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

Re: Change proposal for ISSUE-124, was: ISSUE-124 (rel-limits): Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 17:56:20 +0100
Message-ID: <4CD43734.1050909@gmx.de>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 05.11.2010 17:45, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 17:32:19 +0100, Julian Reschke
> <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Good point.
>> No, it actually should have the effect of not sending the header, and
>> it would be interesting to test that.
>> I'll update the proposal.
>> Thx, Julian
> Note also that it violates the supposed orthogonalness of link
> relations, as this would augment an existing one, much like "alternate"
> does in certain scenarios. Or do I see that incorrectly?

I believe we will have to acknowledge the fact that some link relations 
are of type "annotation" anyway. This applies to both the HTML spec and 
the link relations spec.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 16:57:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:27 UTC