W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2002

Re: robots.rdf

From: Chris Croome <chris@webarchitects.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:43:23 +0000
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020110124323.GC24721@webarchitects.co.uk>
Hi

On Wed 09-Jan-2002 at 06:13:36 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> I think rel="meta" would have been an extremely good idea a few years
> ago (actually I thought it was an obvious one, and assumed it was
> there once.  Always a good idea to check the spec ;-) and it isn't too
> late.

It depends which specification you read, there is a good list here:

  http://www.subotnik.net/html/link.html.en

and here:

  http://fantasai.tripod.com/qref/Appendix/LinkTypes/alphindex.html

Since it's not too late how about someone in the W3C writing a Note
about the use of link="rel"? These are some of the things I'd like to do
with it:

  rel="meta"                  -- RDF metadata for the current document

  rel="meta sitemap"          -- RDF or RSS file pointing to all meta 
                                 data files on the site

  rel="sitemap"               -- XHTML sitemap                               

  rel="syndication"           -- RSS 1.0 headlines

  rel="alternate syndication" -- RSS 0.91 headlines

Also Mozilla is now using rel="first", rel="last", rel="parent",
rel="top", rel="icon", P3P has rel="P3Pv1", IE uses rel="shortcut icon",
none of which are in HTML 4. 

Chris

-- 
Chris Croome                               <chris@webarchitects.co.uk>
web design                             http://www.webarchitects.co.uk/ 
web content management                               http://mkdoc.com/   
everything else                               http://chris.croome.net/  
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 07:42:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT