[whatwg] Absent rev?
martin at weborganics.co.uk
Wed Nov 19 02:08:13 PST 2008
> Martin McEvoy writes:
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Martin McEvoy wrote:
>>>> (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?
> There's a difference between adding an attribute and adding to the set
> of values defined for an attribute; given rel's existence, the cost of
> adding start, up, etc is quite possibly less than of adding rev.
OK that makes sense, what cost is there of using rev and defining a few
rev link types?
> There's also the misuse to consider. If, say, rel=up is barely used but
> when it is used it's generally used correctly then it's benign, and not
> causing any harm. Significant rev misuse has been identified; its
> existence is confusing people into writing something they don't mean.
This is the bit that I find so very wrong the most popular rev value is
rev-made which is used correctly most of the time, Authors Misuse <br>
all the time, the same goes for <address> based on the statement above
HTML5 should drop those too?
More information about the whatwg