W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2017

Re: [whatwg] rel=bookmark

From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:06:35 -0400
Message-Id: <0C9C8E9B-0FCA-43B4-BA3B-85048D0AECF9@pobox.com>
To: Philipp Serafin <phil127@gmail.com>
Cc: WHAT Working Group <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com>
Hi Phil,

> On Aug 6, 2017, at 6:13 AM, Philipp Serafin <phil127@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> As the IETF usecase seems to be about permalinks, is there any requirement
> for rel=canonical regarding validity in the future?

Yes, the quality of persistence is why I thought rel=bookmark worked best, although  canonical was the relation I first thought of too.

As the IETF draft authors describe in a related blog post [1] canonical was dropped from consideration because it exists to "identify content that is either duplicative or a superset of the content at the context (referring) IRI" and does not speak to the durability of the link.

//Ed

[1] http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2016/11/2016-11-07-linking-to-persistent.html
Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 14:07:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 7 August 2017 14:07:03 UTC