@prologic@twtxt.net @movq@www.uninformativ.de :

Thanks!, reading that was useful.

It seems to me that the choice of ‘relative’ was meant to consider users’ use cases (multi-protocol, moving the feeds from one place to another, etc.), without any added convenience to the clients, specifically. Thus, I’d argue that there is nothing against extending the spec to also allow full paths: current users are unnafected, and we’d be catering for new/other use cases.

Yes, I do realize that would mean this would have to go into a new version of the spec, and clients would have to implement it in order to comply with the new version of the spec.