- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 19:32:46 +0100
- 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 agree that "noreferrer" falls into the "annotation" category, same as "nofollow" or "external" for instance. The change proposal doesn't change anything about this; it just makes the link relation behave consistently with respect to where it occurs. Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 7 November 2010 18:33:20 UTC