W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: [webcomponents]: First stab at the Web Components spec

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 07:54:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCWbucbmwuo2B8QAos4+RtkyHv4wR9no=XQf0cN8cPopA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 18, 2013 10:48 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net> wrote:
>> > Le 7 mars 2013 à 18:25, Dimitri Glazkov a écrit :
>> >> Here's a first rough draft of the Web Components spec:
>> >>
>> >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/components/index.html
>> >
>> > Cool.
>> >
>> > I see
>> >
>> >     <link rel="component" href="/components/heart.html">
>> >
>> > Do you plan to allow the HTTP counterpart?
>> >
>> >     Link: </components/heart.html>; rel=component
>>
>> Does that need to be "allowed"?  I thought the Link header was just
>> equivalent, in general, to specify a <link> in your head.
>
> Just bringing this up on list as it has come up in conversations offlist:
> while not currently valid.for htmk, link for Web components will work in the
> body too? #justcheckin

Again, I don't think that's something anyone gets a choice on.  HTML
defines how <link>-in-<body> works, iirc.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 14:55:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:58 GMT