Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-127

On 30.11.2010 00:53, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> Removal of an unused degree of freedom in defining link relations;
>> consistency with link relations in other contexts.
>
> It just removes one unused degree of freedom in favour of another (instead
> of<a>  and<area>  always being the same, it separates them out so in
> theory they could be different), while simultaneously making the spec

Then let's just state that with respect to this, <a> and <area> always 
are treated the same (thus <area> wouldn't need to be mentioned).

> more complicated (it increases the verbosity of the table in the link
> types section).

I'm not concerned with the complexity of the table, but with the 
complexity of the feature it defines.

Best regards, Julian