[whatwg] several messages about XML syntax and HTML5
rubys at intertwingly.net
Thu Dec 7 18:30:30 PST 2006
Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> The pingback specification does exactly what the trackback
>>> specification does, but without relying on RDF blocks in comments or
>>> anything silly like that. It just uses the Microformats approach, and
>>> is far easier to use, and doesn't require any additional bits to add
>>> to HTML.
>> I'd never heard of pingback. I googled for it and found your website
>> first, but couldn't find the RFC number. You have a copyright of 2002,
>> and it appears that Trackback was also developed in 2002. So are you
>> implying they should have used Pingback instead? It appears they were
>> developed in parallel?
> They were made around the same time (Trackback was invented first). My
> point was just that Trackback is not a good example of why you need more
> attributes in HTML, since there are equivalent technologies that do it
> with existing markup and no loss of detail.
I disagree. The pingback specification does NOT do exactly what the
trackback specification does.
Pingback discovery works for any media type, does not deal with any
granularity smaller than a URL.
Trackback discovery is limited to (X)HTML, but can deal with multiple
entries on a single page. Here's an example:
- Sam Ruby
More information about the whatwg