[whatwg] Adding "canonical" to the list of allowed link types
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Jul 28 14:36:17 PDT 2009
On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, James Ide wrote:
> Currently rel="canonical" (
> is not in the allowed set of link types listed at
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#linkTypes . Looking
> back through archived posts, it seems that it was once briefly mentioned
> in passing but there was no discussion regarding its addition to the
> spec. Considering its usefulness, are there plans to add "canonical" to
> the official list of accepted values?
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> I'd support this. There are many cases with web apps when you want to
> present slightly different versions of the same content, where the
> differences are convenient to regular users but immaterial to first-time
> users, such that search engines should treat them interchangeably or
> present a single canonical version to new visitors rather than treating
> them as separate pages. In principle you might think search engines
> could figure this out themselves heuristically, but the three biggest
> have apparently decided they could use some help, so it seems like a
> valuable feature.
> Of course, the way the new value was developed and introduced was
> certainly not ideal. But the same is true for a lot of the things that
> go into the HTML 5 spec.
On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Bil Corry wrote:
> It's is currently listed on the RelExtensions wiki page as referenced by
> the HTML5 draft:
What Bil said. To go further, it will need a formal spec.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg