Re: Re: draft-wilde-profile-link-02 published

Hi Eric,

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Erik Wilde <[email protected]> wrote:

> that's an interesting idea, and to some extent (just thinking beyond only
> links here) you're proposing some form of markdown (i am using this term
> generically here), right? i am afraid there are many variants of that, and i
> haven't seen any one standardized, but maybe the original one does have
> quite a bit of adoption. if a markdown variant would officially declare what
> its profile URI is, then it would be quite a smart way of telling clients
> that they could do a better job of rendering content, if they received
> text/plain associated with that profile URI.

Markdown seems a good choice because it enables basic formatting which
can be translated into a terminal and it is IMO readable when
displayed as text. But it lacks "forms" that was why I think I need a
tiny dsl that could describe forms, but not necessarily inline because
it may decrease readability. May I use a single profile for both the
rendering  of the markdown and the processing of the dsl?

I'm looking to get around the need for such a dsl. For search forms, I
would use OpenSearch by using the Link header field with rel="search"
as standardized by rfc5988. The Link header field is IMO very well
suited for representations which will be consumed by command line
programs because of the way the terminal was meant to be used (the
controls are outside the documents they work on, hence command line
options).

I don't know if I should put efforts in defining new link relations
for what is currently missing in the public domain or simply use a
profile link as in draft-wilde-profile-link-02. If ever form controls
is ever possible to be defined as link relation. Any idea on this?

In all case, a profile link for the markdown rendering looks good.
Thanks for your time.