[whatwg] Absent rev?
martin at weborganics.co.uk
Wed Nov 19 01:35:29 PST 2008
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Martin McEvoy wrote:
>>> The second most common value was rev="stylesheet", which is
>>> meaningless and obviously meant to be rel="stylesheet".
>> And that was the basis of the whatwg decision to drop rev?
Was this the study you based your decisions on?
>> (I am not criticizing just trying to understand it) surely all it needed
>> was to define some rev values (the same as rel) and people will start
>> using rev correctly?
> That's backwards -- looking for a problem to fit the solution, not looking
> for a solution to fit the problem
No not really because If you look at the anyalasis(link above) made in
2005 rev=made (9th) is used more than, rel start, search, help, top, up,
author and a whole lot of other link relationships that have made their
way into HTML5, It doesn't make any sense?
If you have a more up to date study on link relationships, please can I
have a link?
More information about the whatwg