- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:27:47 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Oh - and there's also already an Atom link relations IANA registry, so > it would require a certain amount of coordination. > > What do others think? Should there be a single, flat link relation > registry? The previous spec just deferred to HTML4 for its definitions, do we want to not do that here? It seems like it would be dangerous to invent a third namespace (especially one that overlaps with existing ones), especially for a feature used as rarely as this one. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:27:54 UTC