[Bug 8535] New: For the sake of consistency, should the misspelling not be preserved, at least as an accepted varient? The keywords "noreferrer" and "noreferer" should be equivalent.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8535

           Summary: For the sake of consistency, should the misspelling not
                    be preserved, at least as an accepted varient? The
                    keywords "noreferrer" and "noreferer" should be
                    equivalent.
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#link-
                    type-noreferrer
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: HTML5 spec bugs
        AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org
        ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: ian@hixie.ch, mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org


Section:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#link-type-noreferrer

Comment:
For the sake of consistency, should the misspelling not be preserved, at least
as an accepted varient? The keywords "noreferrer" and "noreferer" should be
equivalent.

Posted from: 86.46.195.33


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 22 December 2009 16:03:10 UTC