Feedback on ISSUE-27 poll feedback, Re: ISSUE-27: rel-ownership - Straw Poll for Objections

On 17.03.2011 17:36, Paul Cotton wrote:
> ISSUE-27: rel-ownership - Straw Poll for Objections
> ...

Here's feedback on what Ian writes in 

> The main issue with this change proposal is that it unifies relation types across multiple protocols and document formats. The rel="" attribute in HTML applies just to HTML; other formats, including metadata outside documents, have different needs and rel="" values should not therefore be forced to have a consistent meaning no matter where they show up.

It's a feature.

The HTML5 spec currently says:

"HTTP Link: headers, if supported, must be assumed to come before any 
links in the document, in the order that they were given in the HTTP 
entity header. (URLs in these headers are to be processed and resolved 
according to the rules given in the relevant specification; the rules of 
this specification don't apply.) [HTTP] [WEBLINK]"

If you believe that they do not necessarily have consistent semantics, 
then you really need a note that their semantics are defined by the 
entries in the IANA registry, not the registry used by HTML.

Best regards, Julian

PS: chairs, please consider this feedback when deciding on ISSUE-27.

Received on Monday, 28 March 2011 12:45:29 UTC