Re: rel="nofollow" attribute

On Friday 21 January 2005 03:45, you wrote:
> > Google and others are introducing a 'rel' attribute value that refers
> > to a document that shouldn't be indexed by search engines.  (See
> > http://www.google.com/googleblog/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html
> > for more information on why they're doing this.)
>
> Seems to be semantic nonsense, since the "rel" attribute value usually
> "describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor" [1].
> There's no existing link type [2] similar to "nofollow", either.
>
> > Should this, or some alternative mechanism that achieves the same
> > ends, be included in XHTML 2.0?
>
> Rather some alternative solution than this attempt, which in my opinion
> should be ignored.

Perhaps instead of flatly saying that a real solution which is actually useful 
_right now_ should be ignored, you would like to propose that alternative 
which is apparently in such high regard.

TX

-- 
             Email: Trejkaz Xaoza <trejkaz@trypticon.org>
          Web site: http://xaoza.net/
         Jabber ID: trejkaz@jabber.zim.net.au
   GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F  A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73