W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2010

Re: link relation "external", was: Link relation types and validity in <link>, was: ACTION-182 and Issue-27

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 22:18:48 +0200
Message-ID: <4C5B1CA8.7060404@gmx.de>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On 05.08.2010 22:05, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de>  wrote:
>> On 05.08.2010 21:46, Edward O'Connor wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1) The description doesn't really explain what it's for.
>>>
>>> There's room for editorial improvement here, sure.
>>>
>>>> 2) I'm not sure why the use case is considered valid; what's wrong
>>>> with using a CSS class for it?
>>>
>>> "When a practice is already widespread among authors, consider adopting
>>> it rather than forbidding it or inventing something new."[1]
>>
>> Is it widespread? Also, how exactly is using class names and CSS for styling
>> something "new"?
>
> Don't really have a horse in this race, but this logic would allow us
> to add an element for declaring external links because "using elements
> in markup isn't something new".
>
> The real question here is if using class names to declare external
> links is something new.
>
> I'm also not a big fan of standards specifying specific classnames.
> ...

Oh, I didn't suggest that. It's up to the page to define the class, and 
CSS rules that make the links display differently.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 5 August 2010 20:19:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 5 August 2010 20:19:36 GMT