Thanks for the replies.
That answered my question.
Regards
Mike Foskett
http://webSemantics.co.uk/
Disclaimer
This is a confidential email. Tesco may monitor and record all emails. The
views expressed in this email are those of the sender and not Tesco.
Tesco
Sorry, resending this, as I don't think my gmail account is signed up
to the list. (if it posted anyway, apologies for the doubler)
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Foskett, Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could someone
Could someone tell me if the following use of rel and rev are semantically
accurate?
a href=#tandc rev=appendixTCs/a
...
div id=tandc ... /div
a href=tandc.html rel=appendixTCs/a
I'm currently developing a pop-up method specifically for Terms
Conditions.
One where the TCs
Susan Grossman wrote:
Since there are no standard values for rel
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/types.html#h-6.12 are the standard link
types for REL and REV. They are open to use with other values, as
specified by a scheme specified by a PROFILE link on HEAD (not that
PROFILE has seen
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Susan Grossman wrote:
Since there are no standard values for rel
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/types.html#h-6.12 are the standard link
types for REL and REV. They are open to use with other values, as
