IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical

Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Sun, 19 June 2011 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@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 44A4D21F8481 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.732
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.732 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.367, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYwQf3eDhRSI for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C634E21F8480 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so3438427pvh.31 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=GCZ0+XtcMxQ2XXOOy/rHCEJqkC9D2FMxE1zfyY+Ax0s=; b=Zr1Nq8xB2Le1VI4dKqo8e2Ja4Fsacs/kZlPR6HiadAn5F67XuHa3tcLizk/97roGfN w9OxUDijt+U47kcHQgaC/dWXg3TCNhrLQEzcWd/24KeNsX7zpb/jmktCYim1y5cZ2z4Q Pz1Lwg/pSj7npJD4umOvVCQkG27GK9I7AlaSg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=AL5aCQYV6JkgNLMDKAQIBClJqMKOO4wA/xn2VTBU1pdmOhZBi5Nafd1jZK93QKeZDr IFhrnBwqZ4hLxJMuHVtg9jlAqtc17XowONoglIaPeV0LlU6YEQpvGAPeEy2ihba9M/Y7 f/Vj23hVm2TOu0u+5jeucMMMzYPp2XkF9tod8=
Received: by 10.142.242.12 with SMTP id p12mr701881wfh.346.1308516965438; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.143.156.6 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4DFB0630.2000504@gmx.de>
References: <BANLkTikDYGMKinQh1xFKfQFVjaoSDcX0KA@mail.gmail.com> <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> <BANLkTi=Xb7OxLfrktOCy+Fd8ymPjErG4rg@mail.gmail.com> <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> <BANLkTik2qGgLnRUi=qSWLA=31z2=ksT_mw@mail.gmail.com> <4DFB0630.2000504@gmx.de>
From: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:55:45 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=SKoruWM9jmE1gOFhjV_8U8QbJ-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: link-relations <link-relations@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 20:56:06 -0000

On 17 June 2011 09:45, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Frank: is the template you posted in April
[...]
> ...what we should use?

Amended by s/similar similar/similar/ one day later, yes.

> The URI seems to be less stable than
[blog entry]
> but appears to have more relevant content...

Well, blog entries are rarely updated, "less stable" here
just means "fresher" or "more relevant".  We can still
hope that a "real" and "stable" specification updates
the registry at some point in time (but obviously not in
2011).

Unrelated, I saw that HTML5 uses rel="icon" also for
what used to be rel="aple-touch-icon", does that mean
we can ignore apple-touch-icon, or should this still be
registered as "obsoleted by" with a pointer to HTML5
or WhatWG HTML?

Similar I'm not sure what to do about "shortcut icon",
is this required anywhere, e.g., in some IE versions?

Or is rel="shortcut icon" always the sme as rel="icon"
at least for .ICO resources (where experts claim that
using the proper MIME type might no work, and prefer
image/x-icon)?

Cheers,
 Frank

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email