W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2004

LINK types

From: Age Bosma <agebosma@home.nl>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:50:16 +0100
Message-ID: <403B64A8.7080108@home.nl>
To: www-html@w3.org

Lately I'm trying to big into web accessibility a bit more.
At the moment I'm playing around with the link tag and the options it's 
providing (or should be).
I'm wondering how some link types are supposed to be used. I've been 
searching on the web a bit and a lot of sites seem to be very good in 
quoting each other and of course the w3c site with the basic description 
of all possibilities. The problem is, nobody is actually providing 
examples on when or how they should be used. I'm even starting to wonder 
if some of them are actually being used at all.

Types like Stylesheet, Start, Next, Prev and Copyright and pretty self 
explanatory and are generally being used.
If it comes to Contents, Index, Section, Subsection and Chapter I'm 
starting the doubt a bit about how to use it and if they are being used 
at all.

E.g. Section and Subsection, explained on the w3c site as "Refers to a 
document serving as a (sub)section in a collection of documents". How 
are they to be used?
If you are on the page where a section is starting containing 
subsections, do you have to provide all the URI's to every different 
subsection page? If so, does this have to be done in a seperate link tag 
for each subsection page?
What happens if a website has multiple sections and subsections and 
you're on a page right in the middle of all sections and subsections?

Or Contents e.g., do I have to create a completely separate page 
containing only all the links to every site section? I mean, the site 
menu usually is listed on every page anyway.
Hasn't this link type become obsolete no that the internet has evolved 
and e.g. global navigation elements are being used on almost all sites?


Age Bosma

P.s. Browsing through the provided w3c mailing lists, this one seemed 
most suitable to post this matter. Please let me know if I was mistaken.
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2004 10:02:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:07 UTC