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

Re: ISSUE-118 CP 3

From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 12:28:12 +0000
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <8C14D1CE-B6A0-4F17-83BB-64B8198E4F9A@geekhood.net>
To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
On 4 Nov 2010, at 11:10, Jirka Kosek wrote:
>>> DocBook stylesheets by default generate such navigational links and
>>> because of this there are tons of content using this feature.
>> If something generates navigational links, but nothing consumes them, then
>> they're not used.
> At least my Opera browser consumes them very well. And for highly
> complex documentation sets presented on web it is very convenient to
> have such navigation. HTML5 should cater for existing usage and not
> throw away useful feature because 99% of users doesn't need it.
> This few rel values doesn't harm anyone and are already used.
> Or should be each feature in HTML5 thrown away if it is not supported by
> N major browsers?

I do have this navigation bar enabled in Opera, but I wouldn't call it implemented very well. It's a dozen buttons with fixed labels (Opera doesn't even read title attribute), and most of them are disabled most of the time. 

Home/Index/Contents buttons have different functions on different pages, e.g. on php.net 'Index' goes up a level, and 'Up' relation is not used. Docbook uses 'Up', but not 'Index', and puts table of contents under 'Home'. HTML5 draft uses 'Index' for table of contents. HTML4 spec has an old-school book-like index page, but does not use rel=index for it. 

Because these link relations are available sporadically, and they're not clear and dependable when available, I don't remember last time when I actually used them.

The only link relation that I find really useful in Opera is rel=next (which is hooked up to "fast forward" button).

regards, Kornel
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 12:28:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:26 UTC