Now that we can change the context of a link using "anchor" and "anchorPointer", does the following statement from section 8.1 still hold true?
for each target resource and link relation type pair, schema authors SHOULD only define a single LDO.
Using anchors, we can define multiple different links using the same target by changing the context. For (contrived) example, if we're representing links in hierarchical data:
As mentioned in the anchor example in section 9.4, using anchor with rel=top is an attractive solution to the lack of an IANA-registered "down" relationship.
While my example seems (to me) like it would be valid, it runs afoul of the "One Link Per Target and Relation Type" rule. Both links have a relationship type of "up" and a target of "parent".
Is the phrasing for section 8.1 a relic from before "anchor" was in the spec? Or am I misunderstanding something about how anchors are supposed to work?
Now that we can change the context of a link using "anchor" and "anchorPointer", does the following statement from section 8.1 still hold true?
Using anchors, we can define multiple different links using the same target by changing the context. For (contrived) example, if we're representing links in hierarchical data:
As mentioned in the anchor example in section 9.4, using anchor with rel=top is an attractive solution to the lack of an IANA-registered "down" relationship.
While my example seems (to me) like it would be valid, it runs afoul of the "One Link Per Target and Relation Type" rule. Both links have a relationship type of "up" and a target of "parent".
Is the phrasing for section 8.1 a relic from before "anchor" was in the spec? Or am I misunderstanding something about how anchors are supposed to work?