Re: link rel/rev (was Re: Breadcrumbs (and some ideas on how to))

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 03:08:35 +0100, Patrick H. Lauke  
<redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles McCathieNevile"
> [snip]
>> <link rev="section" href="myparent" title="immmediate parent document
>>  of  this one" />
>> <link rev="subsection" href="myGparent" title="grandparent document
>>  of  this one" />
>> <link rel="start" href="home" title="home page for this breadcrumb
>>  trail" />
>
> This is probably taking the discussion outside of the realm of  
> accessibility,
> and more into the area of interpretation of standards

Necessarily so, IMHO.

> shouldn't the first two links be rel rather than rev? If I understand the
> spec http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/links.html#h-12.1.2 correctly, rel
> defines how the linked document relates to the current one, while rev
> defines how the current document relates to the linked one.

Well, this is what I had to think about for a while. As far as I can tell,  
rel="section" would imply that the thing at the end of the link is a  
section of the place where the link starts. whereas rev="section" implies  
that the source of the link (the current document) serves as a section of  
the destination. In other words, rel="section" points to a child (and  
rel="subsection" to a grandchild), so rev="section" points to a parent.

Admittedly the spec is remarkably vague on this point - it says that  
something is a section but doesn't seem to explain how you would describe  
the overall relations.

Another place to look is at Amaya's "make book" function (which reads a  
set of relationships  like this and collects the linked things into a  
songle resource). I'll do that and see what it says, when I get a spare  
minute.

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile     charles@sidar.org
Fundación Sidar             http://www.sidar.org

Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 22:50:21 UTC