Re: [blogite] Thoughts on the updated spec

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Simon Willison (simon@incutio.com)
Date: Sun Sep 08 2002 - 16:53:05 BST

At 16:44 08/09/2002 +0000, Jim Dabell wrote:
>Optional, but if used, it must match the <link> element imho. I would have
>said that it should be treated as the definitive information, but some
>things (e.g. a javascript bookmarklet) won't be able to access the http
>header, so the <link> element needs to be the definitive version.

I agree. Originally I was in favour of the X-Pingback header over-riding
the <link> element as doing so would allow owners of static sites to update
all their pingback information but then I realised that this would confuse
clients that do not look for X-Pingback (they would see the <link> element
and be unaware that it has been over-ridden).

I just spotted the pingback-0.9.1 spec in the specs directory on hixie.ch
and it's description of X-Pingback looks spot on:

http://www.hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback-0.9.1

Cheers,

Simon 

-- 
Web Developer, www.incutio.com
Weblog: http://www.bath.ac.uk/~cs1spw/blog/
Message sent over the Blogite mailing list.
Archives:     http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/archives/blogite/
Instructions: http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/blogite/
Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 08 2002 - 18:05:00 BST