On May 27, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Paul Wilkins wrote:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#h-12.1.2
My simplified understanding of the relationship between rel and rev is
With the rel attribute, the relationship that the linked page has
to this link is "foo".
With the rev attribute, the relationship that this link has from
the linked page is "foo".
Actually, I think that's exactly backwards. But that's part of the
reason rev is so confusing.
Use "previous" or "next" as the link values and you'll understand
what's going on.
<link rel="next"> should point to the logically "next" document, so
the linked resource's relationship to the current resource is that it
is "next".
What you describe below seems to reflect the same understanding
though, so maybe we just disagree on the wording.
From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
<a rev="thumbnail" href="http://example.com/video";>
<img src="http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg";>
</a>
I'm not sure if the "rev" attribute is being used correctly in
your markup.
Rev defines the reverse link to the current document, not to
whatever is encapsulated by the link itself...unless I'm reading
the spec wrong
"This attribute describes the relationship from the current
document to the anchor specified by the href attribute"
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-A
A rel link from the video page to the thumbnail would be "thumbnail".
So, a rev link on the thumbnail to the video page would also be
"thumbnail".
I've got no problem with using rel and rev values myself, but if
you're going to use a a custom link-type that's not actually
defined in http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links then
you should use a profile to define what's going on.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
![http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg"](http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg"){kind=link}