- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:18:24 -0400
sjoerd at w3future.com wrote: > The user interface of rel and rev can be exactly the same, only rev under > the heading of "reverse". > > AFAIK there is no difference between > > <a href="1.html" rel="prev"> > > and > > <a href="1.html" rev="next"> So, functionally, you're just breaking a link toolbar into two categories: "forward" and "reverse". What's the use case for this? Surely a "Previous" button in your links toolbar is better than "Reverse->Next" from a UI perspective. Or are you suggesting that the UA should determine the reverse of the relationship and present a button for it? That's really bad for things that don't necessarily have inverses: |rev="top"| -> "bottom"? |rev="first"| -> "last"? |rev="top"| -> "bottom"? |rev="ToC"| -> ?????????? Also note that "refutation" is a bad example, as it would only ever be used in |rev|. Does anyone ever link to a refutation of their article from the article itself??? So what we're seeing is that |rev| encourages us to define relationship types specifically for |rev| that are useless for |rel|. Another thing is that |rev| is largely self-serving: | <a href="http://whatwg.org" rev="supreme-master-guru"> By it's nature, |rev| defines how the universe relates to you. Thus, how can you help but put yourself at the center of the universe?
Received on Monday, 18 July 2005 11:18:24 UTC