Re: Request to register "identifier" relation type

Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com> Wed, 09 August 2017 16:25 UTC

Return-Path: <hvdsomp@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B8513241D for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eOzVRGja0_d2 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22d.google.com (mail-qt0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AADB132412 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 16so39373766qtz.4 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 09:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FIeb/smkOPvNBBD86XVy7mMF4Tu3IVigLaBjqtK1w6g=; b=R8cMgF12zfaqUvld4jXVE3TAr8qqxNjXkOLqCYzNwQaa7/pYtrsrfEZtMw4zrvR9qU FSzGqU5bpb4s7HI4kgMRF3OKpcyeiXawBlDlsY2o1cP3VHsPVa8Ikly5BEPL/1AUWcx5 nfXGDVl6IcEZlWncHXFO7EjsqcK5ojnEoY2Y3DWIgDN/JpQ2bL6LVRxyM/KUB9ogijRJ 2R5EZV70ziJ4xWugvHJ1MfwRLmIsw9Srf0MtrgcbVnBzZvRUADWyWoZzGjc8xRHWaL5X gRGVjdyh486GLwuqIFmJeLoxZTwZzh23+V3FBFSKmz3nP+N508NouklI88UxHMI6+Fbb uBFg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FIeb/smkOPvNBBD86XVy7mMF4Tu3IVigLaBjqtK1w6g=; b=RMWVnR78kTMrV/Z/jkKqDJP5YovHwTREgi5A/Kufa8MCmf1fYshgzmkW8rcwbwbUGG cA50NS4LMh1fAjBj8+an5mvZtnUr7sWKnpGLmZrEoNbbYUlIhHCsmb1/ocsU7B6gkaa0 9n+KyJBdOhWkJafsty9yvNJuGS9jwFoxpBxL4U7XIgdkrIbeQTKUkE8HPMl1SmsovLak E9Q9qVTZlDp97OYpe60QrdcLvOQlY/zZU1+ndKyoe7ehcfCmExjAIU9zl/FHOh5Ilke/ zT1EeYysiEqoG+aP5bjv2iYjeirK/Nn7wfjEibAr+DBttKZ8L7rpun7S8PWpD04jbIhU cFvQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5gru+PuvCk1tROxQT9PpVOf7HHpKmAvCW2XCknjgNLIW36Vob3D 9M/aOdpMxLfTRhRh3SphnZOFOlU6FQ==
X-Received: by 10.200.4.4 with SMTP id v4mr11535917qtg.23.1502295940166; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 09:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.1.194 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <32B88620-D166-4078-8721-8EFCB818E1FE@pobox.com>
References: <CAOywMHeHcwP5h4vzbTY+q00AEYn85F0E+LKqnx0aWpK1kcA1AA@mail.gmail.com> <CAK5Vdzz8=+6pfEDA2gGvtYU8kNx4pPKmsme71szP-JrvhpoTdw@mail.gmail.com> <54CA5E71-F469-4FD9-AF29-21985B454CAE@gmail.com> <DEE2ABBF-1146-4E17-875F-3F5EFFB540FB@pobox.com> <D933EB1A-CB2F-4BD3-9747-C03A0D78CACC@gmail.com> <CAOywMHf5JqQoFXLOi5cuD+HWTxMKu-JcjL_Zp0NWM7wqmBqSbQ@mail.gmail.com> <32B88620-D166-4078-8721-8EFCB818E1FE@pobox.com>
From: Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 18:25:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOywMHdRL2gQAq-o-AGsjridcMagCSHW4Wm4_VnndbnjRTafiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Request to register "identifier" relation type
To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
Cc: link-relations <link-relations@ietf.org>, Peter Williams <pezra@barelyenough.org>, Geoffrey Bilder <gbilder@crossref.org>, Michael Nelson <mln@cs.odu.edu>, Simeon Warner <simeon.warner@cornell.edu>, "John A. Kunze" <jak@ucop.edu>, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f40304378c24dc7b6f055654878c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/LzR7QXsD10azmaUG7KYCa38RSNI>
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/link-relations/>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2017 16:25:44 -0000

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>; wrote:

> Hi Herbert,
>
> > On Aug 9, 2017, at 10:35 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com>;
> wrote:
> >
> > * On August 5, Ed Summers posted a question regarding applying
> "bookmark" to <link> to the WHATWG list, see
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/
> 2017Aug/0001.html. There are no responses to this post, so far.
>
> There have been a few responses if you look at the list of emails for
> August:
>
>     https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2017Aug/
>
> > * On August 9, Ed Summer posted a similar question to WHATWG/HTML
> GitHub, see https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2899. There is a
> reaction from @annevk who (1) speculates that the reason "bookmark" is not
> to be used with <link> might be in order not to overlap with "canonical"
> (2) suggests the use of "canonical" :-)
>
> Yes, canonical seems to be the relation that most people are reaching for
> initially. I did myself on reading your I-D. The fact that seasoned hands
> like Kevin Marks and Anne van Kesteren are as well says something.
>
> > * Michael Nelson has further explored "bookmark" and has confirmed that
> there effectively is a reason for not allowing "bookmark" in <link>. It is
> related to its target use case: surfacing a link for content contained in a
> *part* of a page. Hence, Michael concludes that making "bookmark" usable
> with <link> will most likely not happen. @annevk's GitHub response does not
> seem to contradict that. Michael based his findings on studying
> http://tantek.com/log/2002/11.html#L20021128t1352 and
> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/links.html#link-type-bookmark. He
> may write another blog post about this, but, for now, here's how he
> explained on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/moments/895081563653902336
>
> Yes, it looks like that's probably where things will sit. As Anne
> indicated it's likely that rel=bookmark cannot be used with <link> because
> of perceived confusion it would cause with canonical. The semantics of
> parts of pages vs the page itself don't seem terribly significant to me
> from an implementation perspective. Unfortunately 'identifier' will also
> probably cause some confusion as well. As systems that rely on 'identifier'
> get developed that will be something for them to deal with.
>
> Thanks for considering all the questions and tracking the conversation
> over on the WHATWG list. It speaks to the spirit of what you all are trying
> to achieve with this I-D.
>
>
Thanks for thinking along with us, Ed!

Cheers

herbert


> //Ed




-- 
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==