Re: capturing reserved keywords in @rel

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Right...but what about the spec? As I keep saying, the tricky bit is
> not writing code to do it, but putting it into the spec. Everyone
> keeps saying this is easy, but still no-one has tackled the
> specification side. :(

There's a problem here with your approach: you're trying to make this
match with a future CURIE spec, and I think that's the wrong approach.

>From an XHTML standpoint, we have to deal with existing practices, and
the spec can be very simple: "in XHTML @rel and @rev, ignore
non-prefixed values, except reserved keywords."

> I'm sure the answer will be 'ignore them', but how, exactly?

By just saying "ignore them!"

You're trying to make this consistent with a future generic CURIE spec,
and that's not necessary

> Where would you put that rule?

Specifically when we process @rel.

>   <link rel="license" href="..." />
>   <link rel="[cc:license]" href="..." />

No, we already voted that @rel would take normal CURIEs, not safe
CURIEs. We should not reopen that issue. That would be a major change
from what we've already accepted for more than a year at this point.

The only open issue is what to do with non-prefixed values.

-Ben