[whatwg] Helping people seaching for content filtered by license
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed Jun 10 07:20:20 PDT 2009
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> and there are a number of folks who disagree (not just us in RDFa),
>> including at least two RECs (RDFa and GRDDL).
> Is this claim based on a mere comparison of the description of those
> link relations in said specifications? Perhaps some of the disagreements
> are merely a different wording?
As a matter of fact I don't see RDFa using @profile.
>> The point is: if you assume that @rel="foo" always means the same thing,
>> then many folks believe you're already violating the HTML spec, which
>> specifically uses @profile to modulate the meaning of @rel, and
>> sometimes via another level of indirection.
> Where does nottingham draft define anything that contradicts the default
> HTML 401 profile? Authors will often assume that rel="foo" does means
> the same thing wherever it appears, hence a central register is a
> benefit so that specification writers and profile writers can know what
> the standard semantics are.
The Web Linking draft does not override anything in HTML 4.01. It just
states that generic link relations are a good idea, creates an IANA
registry for them, and defines how to use them in the HTTP Link header.
That being said I *do* believe that it's an incredibly bad idea on using
the same relation name for different things.
More information about the whatwg