- From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 05:36:25 +0100
- To: rescator@emsai.net, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Roger Hågensen <rescator@emsai.net> writes: > On 2014-11-13 18:19, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote: >> AFAIK, all of these interface details lie outside the scope of the >> HTML specification (and rightly so, IMHO). If you need a standard >> symbol for bookmarks I suggest to use U+1F516 BOOKMARK, which looks >> like this „🔖“. > > Then don't spec it but advise or suggest it. Even the bookmark example > at > https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#link-type-bookmark > says "A user agent could determine which permalink applies to which part > of the spec" > thereby acting as a advisory hint/best practice suggestion (note the use > of "could"). > > I also tested the example code (with doctype html obviously) and the > browser behaviouir is still the same, rel="bookmark" is simply ignored. > In that case shouldn't rel="bookmark" be removed from the WHATWG HTML > spec to reflect actual use? As long as it is produced and there do exist consumers? Probably not – many browsers also do ignore rel=alternative, the cite attributes on quotations, the datetime attribute on ins and del elements and so on. -- Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann <http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Received on Monday, 17 November 2014 04:37:07 UTC