Fwd: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST: Relation name: "archives"

(FYI)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST: Relation name: 
"archives"
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 17:55:21 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
To: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
CC: link-relations@ietf.org

On 02.03.2011 14:56, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 31.10.2010 14:04, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 02.09.2010 10:14, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
>>> Relation Name:
>>> archives
>>>
>>> Description:
>>> Provides a link to a collection of records, documents, or other
>>> materials of historical interest.
>>>
>>> Reference:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/links.html#link-type-archives
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>> Template to be added to W3C HTML5 specification before
>>> publication of next Working Draft
>>
>> Sounds good to me.
>
> This definition was just removed from the Editor's draft of HTML5.
> Should it get published as a Working Draft, the reference in the IANA
> registry will be dangling.
>
> The simplest possible fix will be to make the link go specifically to
> the current Working Draft
> (<http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/links.html#rel-archives>),
> which is immutable.

In the meantime, a new WD has been published, so the links in the
registry are now dangling.

Should we (a) remove the registrations, or (b) change the links to go to
the previous WD?

Mike, any preference?

BR, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 16:03:40 UTC