Breno de Medeiros wrote on 2009-09-22:
> For a moment taking the leap that URITemplate gets moved out of the XRD
> spec.
>
> Should in this case <Link> call for '1 or More' URI's? Right now, it
> calls for '0 or More', but without either a URI or URITemplate it is
> not clear what purpose a <Link> element might serve.
Presumably it's 0 or more because it could be either? It's problematic to
make it mandatory to have a URI if you want the possibility of a template as
an extension, right?
If this was removed from the XRD document, what would the resulting
host-meta (or whatever) extension be to add it back? If it ends up just
looking the same, and there are other potential use cases, why not include a
generic element with a straw-man expression syntax and just allow for
replacing it with others once they're standardized?
-- Scott
