Re: LINK tag - why isn't it being implemented by UAs?

Jordan Reiter (
Mon, 9 Jun 1997 09:00:45 -0400

Message-Id: <l03010d01afc1ad0e8be6@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 09:00:45 -0400
To: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <>,
        Colin F Reynolds <>
From: Jordan Reiter <>
Subject: Re: LINK tag - why isn't it being implemented by UAs?

At 11:20 AM +0200 6/9/97, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>   From: Colin F Reynolds <>
>   Since it seems to have gone all quiet on the www-html front, anyone have
>   any objections if I throw in a discussion topic?
> I see nothing wrong with that in general, except I wonder if it's a topic
> for this list.

Well, I'm guessing silence isn't. :-P  Better some discussion than none at all.

> Anyway, I'll just add that LINK is implemented on *some* UA's, like
> Lynx...
> (I didn't misunderstand, did I?  UA = User Agent, which should mean
> browser, right?)

What about the use of the LINK tag for Style Sheets?  IE 3.0 does and the
upcoming Netscape Communicator is supposed to support the use of the LINK
tag in relation to Style Sheets.  Admittedly, that is a very weak and
exclusive support of the LINK tag.

I'm guessing that, like all other tags out there, the LINK tag will only be
used   if browsers begin to support it.  And browsers will only support it
if a lot of people start using it.  I remember reading at least 3 or 4
different manuals on HTML, all of which stated something to the effect of
"you don't need to worry about the LINK tag, it's never used".  I think
once a large enough group of people become interested in HTML in its
*content* potential, instead of its visual uses, then *non-visual* tags
such as LINK and others will begin to be supported.

Well, that's my $.02. :-)

[                    Jordan Reiter                     ]
[                 ]
[ "You can't just say, 'I don't want to get involved.' ]
[  The universe got you involved."  --Hal Lipset, P.I. ]