From: Ian Hickson (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Sep 10 2002 - 22:06:47 BST
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Aquarion wrote:
> > >
> > > The /only/ benefit pingback has over scanning log files is the permalink
> > > that it gives back to the refering article (that is, When I link from
> > > index.php, the pingback tells you the link comes index.php?id=404,
> > > because that's the place you'll /always/ be able to get it)
> > That's a non-trivial advantage.
> For HTML documents, I'd agree. For documents that cannot display the
> resulting information (text files, videos, basically most things that
> arn't X/HTML) having the information recorded seperatly isn't worth it.
Out of band recording of this information (using HTTP headers like:
Link: <http://www.example.net/>; rel="related",
...) is quite possible whatever the format of the document.
Anyway, your arguments seem more directed towards the use of X-Pingback on
documents other than blogs, rather than towards X-Pingback itself. Are you
against the header itself, despite its advantages? (Easy parsing, no need
to get more than the head of the document, and its possible applicability
to blogs in non-HTML formats.)
-- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL "meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' Message sent over the Blogite mailing list. Archives: http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/archives/blogite/ Instructions: http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/blogite/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 11 2002 - 12:05:01 BST