Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Web Publications review (#344)

@domenic there's no "unfortunate naming conflict" as both were created by the same author (i.e. Sir Tim). [RFC 2068](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2068#section-19.6.2.4) was the first appearance of `Link` and states:
> The Link field is semantically equivalent to the <LINK> element in HTML.

The return of the `Link` header in @mnot's [RFC 5988](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988) followed that history.

The more recent [RFC 8288](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288)) notes that things have since diverged from a pure "semantic equivalence" with HTML's `<link>` (and [Atom](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287) links) due to widening uses of both for more nuanced usage. However, there's still effort to understand (and often use) them together.

For example, the HTML Living Standard places [Processing Link Headers](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#processing-link-headers) under [the link element](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#the-link-element) section (and immediately after the [Fetching and processing a resource from a link element](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#fetching-and-processing-a-resource-from-a-link-element)). It's structured that way in part because that relationship is still there as can bee seen also in the [Preload](https://www.w3.org/TR/preload/) spec.

The one-to-one mapping or "semantic equivalence" wasn't at issue here, but to clarify that URL's have been (and are being) used by many communities as `rel` values in HTML and often serve as a more stable (or desirable) identifier for some communities over using either the IANA or the wiki registry.

The ask (which I can make more formally in the correct place) is that something along the lines of this text be reconsidered for re-inclusion into HTML (as I've not found the reasoning for it's removal yet):
> The remaining values must be accepted as valid if they are absolute URLs containing US-ASCII characters only and rejected otherwise.

Thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/344#issuecomment-489754059