- From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:28:57 -0700
- To: Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
All you have to do to fix this is clearly state that 'up' can be any parent, not just a direct parent. My issue is not with having a generic and flexible relation type, but one that is failing to clearly communicate what it is. EHL > -----Original Message----- > From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@tumbolia.org] > Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:25 AM > To: Eran Hammer-Lahav > Cc: Ian Hickson; HTTP Working Group > Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-nottingham-http-link-header (Web Linking) > to Proposed Standard > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:09:41AM -0700, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: > > > This is arguably a good thing. > > > > Ambiguous is not a good thing when it comes to link relations. If the > client > > cannot figure out what the document author intended, things tend to > break. > > I think that depends heavily on the application of the technology. The > Web is > traditionally a very "loose" environment, where UAs have spent decades > figuring > out what authors have meant using reasonably good heuristics. So within > that > context, I think that a bit of built in ambiguity promotes flexibility. > > Best, > > -- > Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 07:29:32 UTC