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

Re: Report on testing of the link relations registry

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:29:38 +0000 (UTC)
To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008211848310.20486@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010, Tantek ~Gelik wrote:
> As far as what elements a particular rel value applies to, I suggest a
> single column: "element restrictions" with permissible values:
> * blank or empty - no restrictions, applies to <a>, <area>, <link>
> elements in HTML
> * "only a, area" - only applies to "a, area" elements for example.
> comma separated list of applicable elements.
> * "not link" - applies to everything but the HTML "link" element for
> example. comma separated list of elements that the rel value does NOT
> apply to.  Of any non-empty restriction, I see this one being used the
> most often.
> If this seems sufficient for the information needed for HTML5, I can go 
> ahead and add this column to the table of existing rel-values.

We actually need slightly more than that, assuming we want to just support 
what the spec says now. This is the current description of the WHATWG 
wiki RelExtensions page:


Specifically, we need a description of the effect on <a>/<area> and on 
<link>, and a list of synonym keywords for canonicalisation.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 21 August 2010 19:30:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 21 August 2010 19:30:20 GMT