- From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 12:58:48 -0400
- To: Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com>
- Cc: WHAT Working Group Mailing List <whatwg@whatwg.org>
Hi Kevin,
> On Aug 5, 2017, at 9:19 PM, Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That use case sounds more like rel="canonical"
You weren't the only one (myself included) who thought that. Michael Nelson, one of the authors if the identifier I-D, just wrote a blog post explaining why not canonical:
http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2017/08/2017-08-07-relcanonical-does-not-mean.html
I think I'm convinced that canonical isn't the right fit for what they are talking about. But if rel=bookmark could be used in <link> elements I think it would work better than a slightly similar, oddly named, link relation, which IMHO is bound to cause confusion for web publishers.
//Ed
Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2017 16:59:15 UTC