[whatwg] Where did the "rev" attribute go?
Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Sat Jul 8 23:56:13 PDT 2006
That clears things up a bit.
But, if the intent is to really get rid of confusion then.... There's
actually 2 things I noticed confuse people.
#1: That the label you pick for the "rel" (or "rev") needs to be a noun. (I
do understand why... at least I think I do... so that you can use the same
label in the "class" attribute. But it makes things difficult for some
#2: That "rel" (and "rev") represent a relation between the two. Often
people seem to want to "classify" what's at the end of the "href". (Instead
of specifying a relation.) Perhaps a new attribute is needed. Perhaps
On 7/8/06, Matthew Raymond <mattraymond at earthlink.net> wrote:
> You make the argument that people might be using |rev| intentionally
> for some values and the the statistical method used by Goggle doesn't
> make that determination. Let's look at the two most common uses.
> If you look at |rev="made"|, the most common use of |rev|, it's
> pretty clear that the use is intentional. However, |rev="made"| is
> pretty much equivalent to |rel="author"|, which is nearly as common, so
> the impact of eliminating |rev="made"| is minimal. If you look at the
> following link, note that |rev="made"| is the only use of |rev|
> mentioned, by the way:
> The second most common usage is |rev="stylesheet"|. Since CSS style
> sheets don't use HTML, let alone <a> and <link>, we can safely assume
> that this is, in fact, either the result of confusion by the author or a
> spelling type, and as you pointed out, a typo is unlikely. This really
> does suggest a genuine problem with people not understanding the
> difference between |rel| and |rev|, since |rel="stylesheet"| is the most
> common use of |rel|. I really wish we could see more data on that, though.
> One of the problems with |rev| is that it's supposed to share values
> with |rel|, but in reality many of these values are either have narrow
> use cases for |rev| or are completely unusable, such as "stylesheet" and
> "icon". In my estimation, this will eventually result in a proliferation
> of values that favor a specific value. In fact, that's what we've seen,
> since most values are |rel|-centric.
> Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
> > For example, I tend to use rev-author, rev-comment, and rev-tag quite
> > [a lot]. These aren't typos; these are intentional. And I do understand
> > what each means and am using them properly.
> None of the values you mention are defined in HTML 4.01, and
> considering you are the one asking for |rev| to be included in "HTML 5",
> I don't think you can consider yourself a typical author.
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Make Television http://maketelevision.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the whatwg