Re: To be Or noT To Be a Link Relation

> On 29 Apr 2015, at 03:20, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Which argument are you referring to?
> 
All of the arguments you put forward in the teleconf will do. There were not that many.

> On Apr 28, 2015 11:54 AM, "henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>" <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>> wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> you had an argument against removing the link relation during this teleconf that I did not understand.
> Where is the place where you defend that point most concicely so I can understand it better? There were a lot of posts recently on the subject.
> 
> Henry
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/ <http://bblfish.net/>
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/