- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:09:40 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On 30.11.2010 01:04, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 30.11.2010 00:53, Ian Hickson wrote: >>> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> >>>> Removal of an unused degree of freedom in defining link relations; >>>> consistency with link relations in other contexts. >>> >>> It just removes one unused degree of freedom in favour of another (instead >>> of<a> and<area> always being the same, it separates them out so in >>> theory they could be different), while simultaneously making the spec >> >> Then let's just state that with respect to this,<a> and<area> always are >> treated the same (thus<area> wouldn't need to be mentioned). > > Why can't we just say that new link relations allowed on both<link> and > <a>/<area> must not be defined to mean different things? That would be a > far less invasive change than your CP suggests and yet would be equivalent > to what you're suggesting would be sufficient for the equivalent problem > with your proposal. I don't think that the proposed change is "invasive"; it's mainly mechanical. However, you don't consider the impact on other registries of link relations; may I remind you of <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/msg00000.html>? That doesn't scale well for additional elements in HTML, or constraints in other formats. >>> more complicated (it increases the verbosity of the table in the link >>> types section). >> >> I'm not concerned with the complexity of the table, but with the >> complexity of the feature it defines. > > Your proposal doesn't change any normative implementation or author > requirements, so it obviously has zero effect on the feature's complexity. First of all, it *does* change the complexity of HTML, until you add prose disallowing different meaning on <link> vs <a>. You haven't done that yet. Second, I'm thinking of the complexity of link relation definitions in general; not only in HTML. For that, it's important to be clear that the semantics of a link relation should not depend on where it appears. Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 11:10:30 UTC