Re: [link draft] Changing the model for links

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