- From: Ed Davies <edavies@nildram.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:00:14 +0100
- To: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > 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. Only as long as it can't change the meaning of existing conforming documents - including those without HTML version information. > I still think URI-based extensibility mechanisms are useful, > but I don't have much of an argument to back my intuitions. > ... Perhaps the microformats-without-profiles supporters should be concerned about the legal liability issues of deducing information from a document which is not licensed by the directly applicable specifications (HTTP, the media type registration for the Content- Type, and so on).
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 12:00:42 UTC