<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>cfis : Content Negotiation And Rails</title>
    <link>http://cfis.savagexi.com</link>
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://cfis.savagexi.com/2006/03/23/content-negotiation-and-rails?format=rss"/>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>Charlie Savage's Blog</description>
    <item>
      <title>Comment on Content Negotiation And Rails by Dan Kubb</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I love the idea of this convention.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It would be nice to have it be the convention in rails that all extensions prefixed with &amp;#8220;r&amp;#8221;, that are not already defined like rxml and rjs, are treated similarly to rhtml and returned with the  Content-Type that corresponds to the extension.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I could see this being used along-side the new Rails 1.1 system.  If you use templates for outputting to the client you might not even need to explicitly use the respond_to method at all.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Then the only reason to use respond_to would be in cases where you want to render content directly from the action and bypass templates for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#8217;ve not looked at the guts of Rails to see if this is possible but if you give it a shot let me know &amp;#8211; I&amp;#8217;d love to patch up my RESTful Rails plugin to support it. ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:35:16 -0600</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:401b4884-7d71-4897-917f-8f10a27c8a20</guid>
      <link>http://cfis.savagexi.com/2006/03/23/content-negotiation-and-rails#comment-83</link>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
