- From: Chris Croome <chris@webarchitects.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:43:23 +0000
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hi
On Wed 09-Jan-2002 at 06:13:36 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> I think rel="meta" would have been an extremely good idea a few years
> ago (actually I thought it was an obvious one, and assumed it was
> there once. Always a good idea to check the spec ;-) and it isn't too
> late.
It depends which specification you read, there is a good list here:
http://www.subotnik.net/html/link.html.en
and here:
http://fantasai.tripod.com/qref/Appendix/LinkTypes/alphindex.html
Since it's not too late how about someone in the W3C writing a Note
about the use of link="rel"? These are some of the things I'd like to do
with it:
rel="meta" -- RDF metadata for the current document
rel="meta sitemap" -- RDF or RSS file pointing to all meta
data files on the site
rel="sitemap" -- XHTML sitemap
rel="syndication" -- RSS 1.0 headlines
rel="alternate syndication" -- RSS 0.91 headlines
Also Mozilla is now using rel="first", rel="last", rel="parent",
rel="top", rel="icon", P3P has rel="P3Pv1", IE uses rel="shortcut icon",
none of which are in HTML 4.
Chris
--
Chris Croome <chris@webarchitects.co.uk>
web design http://www.webarchitects.co.uk/
web content management http://mkdoc.com/
everything else http://chris.croome.net/
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 07:42:52 UTC