Re: Section 4: LDPR/non-LDPR formal definitions

hello henry.

On 2013-03-23 5:54 , Henry Story wrote:
> On 23 Mar 2013, at 02:20, Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> pretty much any media type i know has assumptions around where a link takes you. it may take you to a resource that supports the same media type, or not. while technically speaking, no media type should make assumptions about that, many applications will. when you follow an HTML img/@src link, you expect an image/* response, or you don't really know what to do. same for a/@href, you expect an HTML page, or you don't really know what to do.
> Erik this has nothing to do with the media type, and all to do with the type of relation that the <img src="..">...</img>
> relation is ( if you put on your RDF glasses you'll see relations everywhere ).

the media type defines this relation, it is not something external to 
HTML. on the web, you have two options how to define link relations:

- you can define them within the context of the media type, in which 
case they are often represented i implicit ways (such as defining an 
<img/> element that represents an 'image'-type link).

- you can register them with IANA and make them available for reuse, in 
which case they often are represented in generic link elements such as 
atom's <link rel='' href=''/>.

HTML uses both ways for the link relations it defines/uses, which is 
completely fine, but can be a bit confusing. <img/> is defined by an 
'internal' relation that is not made available for outside use. the 
<link/> element, on the other hand, does have a number of registered 
relations (http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links), so these 
can be used in other media types as well.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Saturday, 23 March 2013 15:52:35 UTC