- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 09:38:28 +0100
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
- CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On 10.11.2010 14:46, Sam Ruby wrote: > ... >>>> Note that the change proposal originated from Mark Nottingham; I'm not >>>> sure whether it should be updated before a poll (reflecting publication >>>> of RFC 5988, supporting web sites, and initial registrations), though. >>> >>> Just be aware: we only intend to survey and evaluate proposals which >>> actually are received. >> >> Yes, but on the other hand all counter proposals were received after the >> deadline. >> >> So I think it would be fair to actually allow Mark to look at the CP and >> consider whether it needs an update. > > Fair enough: I wasn't clear. All I was trying to express is the > sentiment that if we don't get an update, we will proceed with what we > have. If we get an update before we proceed to a survey, we will > evaluate whether or not to include it in the survey. > ... Hi, Mark and I have spent some time updating the initial change proposal, mainly with respect to the status of the "Web Linking" specification and the IANA registry, but also adding refs to related issues (127) and notes with respects to concerns raised in the meantime. See below. -- snip -- Summary This change replaces the Wiki link relation registry with that defined in RFC 5988 "Web Linking" [1], an IETF RFC on the IETF Standards Track, while aligning HTML5's use of links with that described therein. Rationale The link relation types defined in HTML5 are not specific to that format; their semantics can be reused in other formats, as well as by applications other than Web browsing. It is confusing for users to, potentially, have a relation type mean one thing in one application, whilst meaning something different when used in a different format. Furthermore, using a wiki to register relation types, while attractive due to its simplicity, may not be a workable solution in the long run, because the criteria for inclusion, ratification, and deprecation are not well-defined. The current proposal also does not address dispute management and coordination issues, which Wikis generally address by nominating one or a group of administrators. This change addresses these issues by leveraging the IANA registry defined in "Web Linking." A few notes to address concerns raised previously: - Nothing prevents us setting up a Web form that allows people to make registration submissions, thereby streamlining and mostly automating the process of registering a new relation type (a prototype is online at <http://paramsr.us/link-relation-types/>). - The registry is extensible, so that HTML5 and others can add new attributes (e.g., how the referenced resource should be treated for the sake of archiving or storing something for offline use). - The registry is available in a machine-readable form, so that people can incorporate it in validators, etc. - The requirements for registration are low; for most relations all that you need to have is a stable document (e.g., a W3C Note, IETF RFC, publication on microformats.org). This isn't a closed list; e.g., 'search' was registered with opensearch.org. whatwg.org is also a likely candidate. - The Designated Experts for the registry are currently Mark Nottingham, Julian Reschke and Eran Hammer-Lahev. There is a well-defined process for escalating issues and replacing them, if necessary. - If the HTML community has specific concerns or requests, the DEs would like to hear them, so that the registry can give the most benefit to the most people. Details 1) Define the link, a, and area elements in terms of the Web Linking framework; i.e., in terms of "target IRI", "context IRI", "relation type" and "target parameters." 2) Change the relation types defined in "Link types" to be registrations or references to existing relations (as appropriate) in the Link Relation Type Registry. 3) Add fields to the Link Relation Field Registry for "Effect on HTML5 Link Element" and "Effect on HTML5 A and Area Elements", and populate registrations as appropriate. (But see [2] for a request to tune the actual field definitions) 4) Change "Other link types" to refer to "Web Linking" for registration procedures. 5) Review initial registry contents in Web Linking to assure that semantics defined there align with HTML5's. Impact Positive Effects - Link relations will be usable across formats, and aligned with Atom's already existent relation types - Well-defined registration process with change controllers, conflict resolution, long-term maintenance Negative Effects - None known. Conformance Classes Changes None known. Risks None. References [1] <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988> [2] <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127>
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2010 08:39:06 UTC