[whatwg] Fwd: idea for new tag: breadcrums (fwd)

[Ian Hickson]

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, George Lund wrote:
> Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> writes:
> > 
> > Someone sent me a mail suggesting:
> > 
> > | <breadcrumbs>
> > | <a href="/">Main</a> >> <a href="/products/">Products</a> >> Dishwashers
> > | </breadcrumbs>
> > 
> > I think a better way of doing this would be:
> > 
> >   <navigation>
> >    <p>
> >     <a href="/" rel="top up up up">Main</a> &gt;
> >     <a href="/products/" rel="up up">Products</a> &gt;
> >     <a href="/products/dishwashers" rel="up">Dishwashers</a> &gt;
> >     Second hand
> >    </p>
> >   </navigation>
> > 
> > ...where we define rel="up" to mean "go up one level" (as now) and add the
> > semantic that if the keyword is repeated, then it means up that many
> > levels. I've noted this as something the spec will have to talk about.

I've now added this to the spec. Let me know if you see any problems with 
it.


> URLs already have these semantics built-in.  <a href="../"> means 
> something special to web browsers without having to invent a new way of 
> doing that. What would these keywords do extra that can't already be 
> done if authors organise their URL-spaces sensibly?

Well, some people can't organise their URL-spaces sensibly. Also, the URL 
space can only represent one hierarchy.


> The idea of a <navigation> element would be very useful (like giving 
> speaking browsers the chance to skip their contents, for example).

We now have <nav>.


> But I don't see why that <p> mark-up should be added, as what we have 
> there isn't a normal paragraph in most human languages.  It's more like 
> some kind of specially-ordered list, if anything.

Yes, <ol> would also work here.



On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Olav Junker Kjær wrote:
> 
> By sensible URL-spaces, I assume you mean using slashes in URLs to 
> indicate the hierarachy? 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 break links. URL's should be allowed to be 
> opaque.

Indeed.


On Tue, 7 Dec 2004, George Lund wrote:
> 
> 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 
> 'RESTful'.

Sure. But sometimes a resource is in two (or more) hierarchies at once, 
and then you can't use the URL space anymore.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'