W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

IANA Link Relations Registry (draft-nottingham-http-link-header)

From: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 15:03:11 +0200
Message-ID: <21606dcf0909060603g70a69314u878ab6d2ef939b2e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark,
The current Web Linking draft (draft-nottingham-http-link-header-06)
specifies a 'Link Relation Type Registry'. Would you be so kind as to drop
the word 'Type' from this title as it is superfluous and could some mapping
between "link relations" and "media types".

The existing registry is called 'Atom Link Relations' and has a short name
of link-relations (http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/). I
propose that we simply drop "Atom" from the title and run with "Link
Relations" in light of the fact that they are generic. Further, I propose
that the existing registry be used in place as compatibility with Atom is
retained and there are a number of resources that link to it currently -
this request should be reflected in the draft. There is enough confusion
already as an out of date HTML
version<http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/>is maintained
at the same location (last updated 2008-05-20) in addition to
the XHTML<http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml>,
XML <http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml> and
TXT <http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.txt>versions
(last updated 2009-02-20). The reference to RFC4287 in the header
of this registry should also be updated to the "Web Linking" RFC (to be
assigned).

I hope it is not too late to accommodate these requests in the next revision
as I believe that keeping this as simple as possible will facilitate
adoption and reduce confusion.

Sam
Received on Sunday, 6 September 2009 13:03:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:10 GMT