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

Re: Rel="first" and "index" breaks specs and implementations

From: Alexandre Alapetite <alexandre@alapetite.fr>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:59:29 +0100
Message-ID: <42a8e2e00911151459rb6f0058wa6071ab3f78f2602@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-html@w3.org
Copy of http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7475#c4

Dear Ian,
With regard to @rel={top,index,contents,toc}, I believe that the
situation before HTML5 was pretty clear and with a good consensus, but
the current HTML5 draft introduces some severe incompatibilities
(please note that I have no issue with @rel="first" as currently
defined in HTML5, so the title of this bug could be updated AFAIC).

In order to illustrate this fact, I have attempted to summarise the
major information in the following draft table:

http://alexandre.alapetite.fr/divers/vrac/20091115_HTML_link_rel.html

The problem in the current version of HTML5 can IMHO be resumed to the
following:

1) The traditional concepts of "table of contents" and "index" (i.e. a
list of names or topics that are referred in a book, etc., usually
arranged at the end of a book in alphabetical order) have disappeared
in HTML5, while they exist in HTML4, HTML3.2, are used in the wild
(also in other W3C documents), and backed up by several
implementations, all agreeing. (See the above table for details)

2) Those two traditional concepts of "index" and "table of contents"
have been merged into the traditional concept of "top" or "home", as
defined in HTML3.2 and implemented in e.g. Opera, SeaMonkey, etc.
There is also a good consensus in the interpretation of "top" or
"home".

3) Against all definitions, this traditional concept of "top" or
"home" has been renamed "index" in HTML5. The current definition of
"index" in HTML5 ("leading to the document that is the top of the
hierarchy") has simply nothing to do with an index (as defined in an
English dictionary, or HTML4, HTML3.2, etc.).

Therefore, I urge you to reconsider this chapter, for which I propose
the following changes.

A) (6.12.3.17.1) Rename this concept "top" instead of the erroneous
"index", and remove "index", "contents" and "toc" from this concept.
Maybe add "home" as a synonym.

B) Reintroduce the traditional concept of "index" (i.e. a list of
names or topics that are referred in a book, etc., usually arranged at
the end of a book in alphabetical order), or in the worst case just
drop it from the specification.

C) Reintroduce the traditional concept of "Table of Contents" (i.e. a
list of the main points or information in a book, usually at the front
of the book), or in the worst case just drop it from the
specification. Make "toc" a synonym.

D) (Detail) Maybe add "parent" as a synonym of "top".

Should it be necessary, I would be willing to contribute my services
to improve this chapter, or create documents summarizing the current
situation as I have just attempted with

http://alexandre.alapetite.fr/divers/vrac/20091115_HTML_link_rel.html

Thank you for your consideration.

Best regards,
Alexandre Alapetite
Technical University of Denmark
http://alexandre.alapetite.fr

P.S.: Thanks to Leif Halvard Silli for his contributions.
Received on Sunday, 15 November 2009 23:00:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:52 GMT