W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2011

Re: TAG ISSUE-25 deep linking

From: Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:27:04 +0200
Message-ID: <C9CA2DD8.A476%daniel.appelquist@vodafone.com>
To: "Paul Libbrecht" <paul@hoplahup.net>
Cc: "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org>, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>, "tag" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 12/04/2011 15:47, "Paul Libbrecht" <paul@hoplahup.net> wrote:
> Le 12 avr. 2011 à 16:07, Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group a écrit :
>> In essence, it we would like to make the assertion that linking is a form of
>> speech, and so should be protected in the same way that speech is protected.
> Daniel,
> while thinking about blogging this (really good) news item, I thought about
> copying the link to the German court, or even giving it to tinyURL so that it
> responds it and I suddenly feared this might be not allowed.
> That fear is exactly what you are trying to elucidate, or?
> (i.e. I've been to place X and I know I can tell you could (try to) go to
> place X).

The argument (we are trying to make) is more a technical / architectural
argument than a philosophical / social argument. Something like: Given that
the Web works like X and that "speech / expression" works like Y, a link
should be viewed as akin to other, already existing mechanisms of speech.
This should be relevant social and legal discourse relating to linking, in
support of free expression where free expression is the norm. However, it
won't stop bloggers from being jailed elsewhere ( http://nyti.ms/h0iP7j ).

Also please understand this is a work in progress. It will go through many
revisions and will not necessarily become a TAG finding. It is an
exploration for now to see if we can put forward some coherent and helpful


Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 15:27:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:10 UTC