Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST: Relation name: "next"

Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> Thu, 02 September 2010 12:12 UTC

Return-Path: <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
X-Original-To: link-relations@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D88653A6A84 for <link-relations@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 05:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.084
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.084 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.515, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k5K1W15BnLXt for <link-relations@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 05:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no (smtp.domeneshop.no [194.63.248.54]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91C8D3A6A91 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 05:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cm-84.208.110.159.getinternet.no ([84.208.110.159] helo=[10.0.1.4]) by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>) id 1Or8ef-0007Bc-SH; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:12:33 +0200
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:12:33 +0200
From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Message-ID: <20100902141233393342.0a0fb682@xn--mlform-iua.no>
In-Reply-To: <31E56538-C14F-40A7-92FC-C2D05E6AF7E1@mnot.net>
References: <20100902081410.GD58403@sideshowbarker> <31E56538-C14F-40A7-92FC-C2D05E6AF7E1@mnot.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Målform.no
X-Mailer: GyazMail version 1.5.10
Cc: "Michael Smith (tm)" <mike@w3.org>, link-relations@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST: Relation name: "next"
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:12:07 -0000

Mark Nottingham, Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:34:41 +1000:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Just to start discussion, I'll give initial thoughts in one e-mail, for now.
> 
> One general observation - relations that are potentially usable in 
> formats other than HTML should be defined in such a way that they're 
> not HTML specific. The only reason I mention this is that the 
> specification links go directly into HTML-specific text, without any 
> definition of semantics, etc.
> 
> E.g., with 'alternate', the link goes to:
> 
>> 4.12.3.1 Link type "alternate"
>> 
>> The alternate keyword may be used with link, a, and area elements.
>> 
>> The meaning of this keyword depends on the values of the other attributes.
>> 
>> If the element is a link element and the rel attribute also contains 
>> the keyword stylesheet
> [...]
> 
> It would be helpful (especially since alternate is already used by 
> Atom) if this were rewritten to something like:
> 
>> 4.12.3.1 Link type "alternate"
>> 
>> The 'alternate' link type gives alternate representations of the 
>> current document.
>> 
>> In HTML documents, the alternate keyword may be used with link, a, 
>> and area elements.
>> 
>> The meaning of this keyword depends on the values of the other attributes.
>> 
>> If the element is a link element and the rel attribute also contains 
>> the keyword stylesheet
> [...]
> 
> See what I mean?
> 
> 
> Beyond that, I see three groups of relations here;
> 
> 1) Updating HTML4 registrations, including:
>   next / alternate / bookmark / index / prev / stylesheet / help
> 
> There shouldn't be any issues with these. The only thing I'd note is 
> that 'alternate' is also used by Atom, but it's already registered by 
> HTML4, so it shouldn't be a problem. 
> 
> 2) Registering new relations, including:
>   archives / icon / noreferer / tag / pingback / prefetch / sidebar / 
> external / author / nofollow / search 
> 
> 'pingback' and 'search' refer to external specifications. We'll need 
> to talk through the implications of that.
> 
> 3) Updating registrations from other sources, including:
>   license / up / last / first
> 
> These might need a bit more discussion, especially license, which is 
> currently defined by RFC4946. Is there any reason that its definition 
> isn't adequate for HTML5?
> 
> The others need to be coordinated with the individuals who originally 
> registered the relations -- Noah Slater for up, and myself for first 
> and last. I don't think there will be any problem for mine, at least.

There is bug and tracker request w.r.t. to 'first' and some other 
relations in the HTMLwg. Thus I think that Mike was to early in sending 
registration requests for some of these link relations.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7475
-- 
leif halvard silli