[whatwg] Fwd: idea for new tag: breadcrums (fwd)
george at lund.co.uk
Tue Dec 7 11:44:25 PST 2004
In message <41B4DD26.4000608 at olav.dk>, Olav Junker Kjær <olav at olav.dk>
>George Lund wrote:
>> What would these keywords do extra that can't already be
>> done if authors organise their URL-spaces sensibly?
>By sensible URL-spaces, I assume you mean using slashes in URLs to
>indicate the hierarachy?
I do mean that, yes.
> This is not really practical since it won't work with many CMS'es, and
>it prevent you from moving rearranging the hierarchy since this will
Well, HTTP has well-defined ways of indicating that a resource has
moved. HTML shouldn't be trying to take over from these established
(and well-designed) divisions of labour within the system.
What's proposed is a system where people (or processes) are forced to
edit the _contents_ of an object just because it has moved, whereas
conceptually moving something around in a hierarchy doesn't necessarily
require any modification of the object's contents at all. I think I'd
be correct to point out that such a situation wouldn't be very
> URL's should be allowed to be opaque.
A URL can be opaque if you want, just as you can write nonsense HTML if
you like, but if you want to take advantage of certain features of the
Web then it had better not be.
Why introduce a new hierarchical system, when the URI/L specifications
permit one that is actually implemented in all Web browsers already?
CMS systems that don't mesh well with the mechanisms already built into
the Web are broken. I'm well aware that includes many of them - but
it's wrong to break (or simply over-engineer) HTML in order to find a
More information about the whatwg