- From: Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2017 02:19:54 +0100
- To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Cc: WHAT Working Group Mailing List <whatwg@whatwg.org>
That use case sounds more like rel="canonical" On 6 Aug 2017 2:07 am, "Ed Summers" <ehs@pobox.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I was wondering if anyone can provide any information, or a pointer to > previous discussion, about why the bookmark link relation can't be used > with the <link> element [1]. > > The topic has come up recently on the IETF link-relations discussion list > [2] where a new link relation has been proposed to encourage persistent > linking [3]. The proposed 'identifier' relation seems to closely resemble > the idea of a permalink (a persistent link) that can be found in the > definition of bookmark. If bookmark allowed use with the <link> element > then I think there would be less of a demonstrated need for the new > 'identifier' link relation. > > Thanks for any information you can provide. I apologize if I'm restarting > a conversation that has already happened. > > //Ed > > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/links.html#link-type-bookmark > [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/ > current/msg00670.html > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandesompel-identifier/
Received on Sunday, 6 August 2017 01:20:22 UTC