- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 17:14:11 +1100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 05/02/2010, at 11:24 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > HTML5 doesn't have rev anymore anyway (well, unless the WG changes this again) > > So why don't we just say that "rev" means what HTML2 used to say, and be done with it? Because (IMO) implementation experience has shown that rev= is horribly confusing* to developers, and will cause more problems than it solves; it's much better to just register a different relation (even if that does offend those who like tidiness). I'd be OK with putting it in the BNF, giving the HTML2 explanation, and deprecating it in prose, though. * For those who dispute this, have a look at blog and other discussions of rev=canonical; it tripped up a lot of people. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 8 February 2010 06:14:55 UTC