On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:50:09 +0100, Phil Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Also, I definitely do not want to start having to implement support
for http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet besides just
stylesheet. (Not for the Link HTTP header or for the HTML elements.)
That's just additional complexity for no gain and will only lead to
bugs and differences among browsers.
There shouldn't be any need for UAs to resolve tokens given as values
for @rel as absolute URIs and no one's suggesting that UAs should
actually make an HTTP request of any kind to iana.org every time there's
a link to a stylesheet. It's the person minting the new relationship
type that needs to check. What it means is that if you create a link
(HTML or HTTP) and use a @rel type 'foo' that gives a 404 from
http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/foo then you really shouldn't
expect UAs to do anything sensible with it.
Whether a UA chooses to actually implement support for a registered @rel
type remains very much up to the UA developer of course.
The concern is that besides supporting stylesheet (and it's case variants)
we'd also have to support
http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet meaning the same
thing. And thus also http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate
and the special behavior you get when both (stylesheet and alternate) are
specified. We can map http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet
to stylesheet and such first, but I don't think adding another layer of
complexity is justified.
(I'm not at all concerned about UAs having to fetch such URIs, as any such
proposal would be stillborn.)
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
