W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: up up up, was: Last Call: draft-nottingham-http-link-header (Web Linking) to Proposed Standard

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:18:52 +0000 (UTC)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908311018301.26930@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > >
> > > On the other hand, the advantage you are citing is only an advantage 
> > > if a given resource only contains "up up up", but not also "up up" 
> > > and "up". What you be the point of that?
> > 
> > A UA that treats any number of "up"s as the same would not interpret 
> > "up" as "up1", but as meaning that the referenced document was some 
> > higher- level document in the hierarchy.
> 
> Again, what would be the point of this case ("up up up" being present, 
> but not "up up" and "up")?

Why would they not be present?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 10:17:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:51 UTC