[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"

To: Isofarro <yahoosyndication@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
From: Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:52:57 +0000
Cc: atom-syntax@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2

Quoting Isofarro <yahoosyndication@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>
> If I have stumbled across a genuine problem, then I make the suggestion of
> using rel="bookmark" for the URI being discussed, and keep using rel="related"
> for related links.

Does the "related relationship" confuse anyone else?

Robert Sayre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
  - From: Anne van Kesteren

References:
- [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
  - From: Isofarro

Prev by Date: Re: PaceSimpleContentType
Next by Date: Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
Previous by thread: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
Next by thread: Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread