[whatwg] rel=bookmark

Ed Summers ehs at pobox.com
Mon Aug 7 07:06:35 PDT 2017

Hi Phil,

> On Aug 6, 2017, at 6:13 AM, Philipp Serafin <phil127 at gmail.com> wrote:
> As the IETF usecase seems to be about permalinks, is there any requirement
> for rel=canonical regarding validity in the future?

Yes, the quality of persistence is why I thought rel=bookmark worked best, although  canonical was the relation I first thought of too.

As the IETF draft authors describe in a related blog post [1] canonical was dropped from consideration because it exists to "identify content that is either duplicative or a superset of the content at the context (referring) IRI" and does not speak to the durability of the link.


[1] http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2016/11/2016-11-07-linking-to-persistent.html

More information about the whatwg mailing list