- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:26:40 +0200
- To: "Phil Archer" <phil@philarcher.org>
- Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:23:23 +0200, Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org> wrote: > Yes, I understand that. I'm trying to suggest a general way forward. If > "alternate stylesheet" is the only contextual relationship already > deployed (?) then an exception can perhaps be made for that but the > introduction of "up up" and, no doubt, others in the future, needs to be > disambiguated. As it is now, we have two different meanings of rel="x y" > depending whether X and y happen to be alternate and stylesheet or some > other values. Yes, you'll have to know the actual values. You'll need to know those anyway though to know what the link relation means. > If such a formalism were to be introduced then "alternate stylesheet" > can be deprecated and who knows, might one day even disappear along with > <FONT> ;-). Things do not disappear on the Web :-) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2009 10:27:44 UTC