W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2010

[wbs] response to 'ISSUE-118 Specification breaks semantics of existing link relations "index" and "first" - Straw Poll for Objections'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of tai@g5n.co.uk <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 11:48:01 +0000
To: tai@g5n.co.uk,www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-adb97aee45dd324940cd1e1774d7c43e@cgi.w3.org>

The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'ISSUE-118
Specification breaks semantics of existing link relations "index" and
"first"  - Straw Poll for Objections' (HTML Working Group) for Toby
Inkster.



---------------------------------
Objections to the Change Proposal to Create a well founded consolidation
of the link types
----
We have a Change Proposal to change some link types to their pre-HTML5
meaning, but also change some other link relations to be synonyms and
consolidate the set overall. If you have strong objections to adopting this
Change Proposal, please state your objections below.
Keep in mind, you must actually state an objection, not merely cite
someone else. If you feel that your objection has already been adequately
addressed by someone else, then it is not necessary to repeat it.
Objections: 
No objections.




---------------------------------
Objections to the Change Proposal to Simplify the incumbent rel="" model
----
We have a Change Proposal to simply some link relations relative to HTML4.
If you have strong objections to adopting this Change Proposal, please
state your objections below.  Keep in mind, you must actually state an
objection, not merely cite someone else. If you feel that your objection
has already been adequately addressed by someone else, then it is not
necessary to repeat it.
Objections: 
Strong objection.

This changes the definitions of rel values (especially rel=index) from
HTML4, introducing differences between how it's defined in HTML5 and how
it's defined virtually everywhere else (HTML4, XHTML 1.x, RDFa and the IANA
link registry).

The proposal cites a single implementation as justification for the
change. While I grant that this implementation is a major one, given that
it's just one implementation, a small patch could bring it into line with
the rest of the world. Wordpress has a history of security problems, so
many of its users upgrade on a very frequent basis. Thus, if new releases
of Wordpress were brought into line with the semantics of other
implementations, data published using old releases would quickly diminish
to insignificance.

Wordpress also has a history of using outputting fairly good, semantically
correct HTML. Thus if clear guidelines on which rel values are synonymous,
which differ, and how they all should be used were included in the HTML5
specification, such as the guidelines summarised in the first change
proposal, it seems likely that Wordpress' developers would be amenable to
accepting such a patch.




---------------------------------
Objections to the Change Proposal to Drop support for certain rel=""
values
----
We have a Change Proposal to drop support for certain rel entirely, based
on lack of interest from users and implementors. If you have strong
objections to adopting this Change Proposal, please state your objections
below.
Keep in mind, you must actually state an objection, not merely cite
someone else. If you feel that your objection has already been adequately
addressed by someone else, then it is not necessary to repeat it.
Objections: 
Weak objection.

These semantics seem useful enough to keep in the specification.


These answers were last modified on 9 December 2010 at 11:47:38 U.T.C.
by Toby Inkster

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-118-objection-poll/ until
2010-12-16.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 11:48:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:33 GMT