Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Should introduce these link relations:
* http://opds-spec.org/sort/new
* http://opds-spec.org/sort/popular
* http://opds-spec.org/sort/featured
Original comment by abdela...@gmail.com
on 4 May 2010 at 6:06
I'd rather like to make relations TO a Hierarchical Collection that do not use
one of the relations we've introduced
(above) use
+ * "subsection": A Hierarchical Collection not better described by a more
specific relation.
Original comment by abdela...@gmail.com
on 4 May 2010 at 11:46
== Hierarchical Collections ==
A Hierarchical Collection is an OPDS Catalog Document whose Entries serve to
create a suggested hierarchy for
presentation and browsing. A Hierarchical Collection MUST NOT contain OPDS
Catalog Entries but instead
contains basic Atom Entries that link to other Hierarchical or Publication
Collections or other Resources. Each
Entry's atom:content SHOULD include a brief description of the linked Resource.
Links to Hierarchical Collections SHOULD use the type attribute
"application/atom+xml;type=feed;profile=opds-catalog". OPDS Catalog providers
should choose the best
relation for each Hierarchical Collection based on the relations in Catalog
Relations. The relation "subsection"
MUST be used if no other relation is more appropriate.
Original comment by abdela...@gmail.com
on 4 May 2010 at 11:58
I'm not sure I understand. Is the main catalog of, for example, Feedbooks
concerned
by this new evolution ?
Calibre2Opds is in the same case, because the main catalog simply points to
subcatalogs, one for each category (tags, authors, series, recent books,
ratings, and
all books)... Do I have to change this to be atom entries ?
Original comment by dpier...@gmail.com
on 5 May 2010 at 3:17
No you don't, it's still valid if you only use "application/atom+xml" or
"application/atom+xml;type=feed". It's slightly better though if you also
provide the
profile media parameter.
Original comment by hadrien....@gmail.com
on 5 May 2010 at 4:37
Original comment by abdela...@gmail.com
on 25 May 2010 at 5:44
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
abdela...@gmail.com
on 10 Mar 2010 at 3:55