W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2009

[whatwg] Rel and META values

From: Jeremy Keith <jeremy@adactio.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:32:17 +0100
Message-ID: <8E4F1786-93B2-4DAC-B9ED-33324A971283@adactio.com>
Five days ago I wrote:
> No META value will *ever* become a microformat; the very concept of  
> invisible metadata is anathema to microformats?it's impossible for a  
> META keyword value to pass the microformats process.
>
> Should everything on the wiki page be marked as "unendorsed" or,  
> more realistically, should the conditions for acceptance be altered?

I've updated the wiki page for META values, removing the reference to  
the microformats process.
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions#Process

Meanwhile, back on the Rel values wiki page...
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions

Can anyone help with either of my questions:

> 1. Should I change all of the values derived from XFN from  
> "proposal" to "accepted" as they seem to fit this criteria?
>
> 2. I don't think passing the buck to the microformats community is  
> necessarily a good idea. There are perfectly  good values listed  
> (e.g. rel="accessibility") that would/should probably never become a  
> microformat but are still good semantic values. Will they really be  
> rejected outright?

Thanks in advance,

Jeremy

-- 
Jeremy Keith

a d a c t i o

http://adactio.com/
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 03:32:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:14 UTC