- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 08:55:08 +0200
- To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- CC: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, spec-prod@w3.org
On 2012-07-05 13:10, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > ... > 2. rel="biblioentry" in bibliography links. The HTML5 spec requires all rel > values to either be defined in the HTML5 spec itself or to be registered as > a valid values at http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-rel-values > > "biblioentry" is listed there, but in the "dropped" section > http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-rel-values#dropped which says "In > general, you should not use any dropped values." And the reason biblioentry > is listed in that section is because it was once listed in a pre-HTML4 > non-normative "Proposed Relationship Values" draft but never actually ended > up being included in the HTML4 specification. So there is actually no > normative specification for biblioentry anywhere. > ... I agree that not properly defined rel names should not be used. On the other hand, the validity thing is incorrect; we have <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0556.html> (decided over three months ago but not in the spec yet) which makes these checks optional. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 6 July 2012 06:56:37 UTC