- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:03:37 -0500
- To: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Originally, values of @rel and @class were the author's choice, much like HTTP path names. In both cases, well-known names have cropped up. rel="tag" and class="vcard" are much like /robots.txt I suppose the HTML WG has the right to "take back" @rel and @class values, but I'm uneasy about it. I still think URI-based extensibility mechanisms are useful, but I don't have much of an argument to back my intuitions. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/14-html-wg-irc#T19-47-16 Sorry to be so brief; more later, I hope... http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#standardizedFieldValues-51 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#siteData-36 -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 16 July 2007 16:03:48 UTC