On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, James Ide wrote:
Currently rel=canonical (
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html)
is not in the allowed set of link types listed at
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#linkTypes . Looking
back through archived posts, it seems that it was once briefly mentioned
in passing but there was no discussion regarding its addition to the
spec. Considering its usefulness, are there plans to add canonical to
the official list of accepted values?
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
I'd support this. There are many cases with web apps when you want to
present slightly different versions of the same content, where the
differences are convenient to regular users but immaterial to first-time
users, such that search engines should treat them interchangeably or
present a single canonical version to new visitors rather than treating
them as separate pages. In principle you might think search engines
could figure this out themselves heuristically, but the three biggest
have apparently decided they could use some help, so it seems like a
valuable feature.
Of course, the way the new value was developed and introduced was
certainly not ideal. But the same is true for a lot of the things that
go into the HTML 5 spec.
On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Bil Corry wrote:
It's is currently listed on the RelExtensions wiki page as referenced by
the HTML5 draft:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions
What Bil said. To go further, it will need a formal spec.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
