Re: HTML Link Types [Was: Linking RDF]

Aaron Swartz wrote:
> 
> Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com> wrote:
> 
> > HTML 2.0 used NAMES for %linkType;,
> > which is even more restrictive than NMTOKENS. HTML 3.2 described
> > link types still as tokens. The most that has been written on the
> > subject that I'm aware of is the IETF draft by Murray Maloney and
> > Liam Quin (draft-ietf-html-relrev-00.txt), which again uses name
> > tokens as examples. If HTML 4 had intended to include URIs as 'rel'
> > and 'rev' values, it would have specified the parameter entity
> > differently or mentioned this possibility in the specification.
> 
> Thank you for clearing up the history of this. I was unaware of this
> information and that led to my confusion.

This isn't to say that a facility for specifying such information via
URL wouldn't be interesting or valuable. I hope to begin work on the
Dublin Core-in-XHTML project in the next week if possible (this week
is entirely tied up). This would be one possible way to approach this
problem, but whatever approach it will be a new invention and I 
believe it should be thought through carefully, not an overloading
of existing syntax. In this way, software expectations will not be
confused and there will be an explicit functionality assumed from
the new syntax.

Murray

...........................................................................
Murray Altheim, SGML/XML Grease Monkey     <mailto:altheim&#64;eng.sun.com>
XML Technology Center
Sun Microsystems, 1601 Willow Rd., MS UMPK17-102, Menlo Park, CA 94025

         america was once a paradise 
         of timberland and stream
         but it is dying because of the greed
         and money lust of a thousand little kings -- archy (1927)

Received on Sunday, 29 April 2001 05:52:30 UTC