Re: Slightly updated CP for 124

Updated version of the Change Proposal:

SUMMARY

There's no reason to disallow noreferrer and nofollow on <link>.

RATIONALE

It's an unnecessary restriction.

DETAILS

Change the table in [1] to say "effect on link: annotation".

Change the introductions in [2] and [3] to allow the relation on <link> 
as well.

[2]:

"The nofollow keyword may be used with link, a, and area elements. It 
does not create a link, but annotates any other links created by the 
element (the implied type of link, if no other keywords create one)."

[3]:

"The noreferrer keyword may be used with link, a, and area elements. 
This keyword does not create a link, but annotates any other links 
created by the element (the implied type of link, if no other keywords 
create one).

It indicates that no referrer information is to be leaked when following 
the link.

If a user agent follows a link that has the noreferrer keyword, the user 
agent must not include a Referer (sic) HTTP header (or equivalent for 
other protocols) in the request.

This keyword also causes the opener attribute to remain null if the link 
creates a new browsing context."




IMPACT

1. Positive Effects

Less special-casing; nofollow and noreferrer would behave the same on 
all elements.

2. Negative Effects

None.

3. Conformance Classes Changes

More documents become conforming; conformant implementations need to 
implement the two link relations on <link> as well.

4. Risks

None.


REFERENCES

[1] <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#linkTypes>
[2] <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#link-type-nofollow>
[3] <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#link-type-noreferrer>

Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 19:58:23 UTC