[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Link Extensions and IANA, W3C?
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Link Extensions and IANA, W3C?
- From: Bob Wyman <bob@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:22:23 -0400
- Cc: Atom-Syntax <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=4+E//w9wmvS/8fIB/K3a6sZ6sy4/+yY3M7fjfUSUTUQ=; b=SrBc3zqfHptoEcV1bXsXkwXVCH5HVyWjfi9TCpZnJKkabiGyC/CxloQnTUnjEOanpm 0jVhGfC+JcCNt8fViCkX1MYg0ay8KVRGiP72lGX6IZ+3q5hWBqjTu7Opauszms2sewyY P2s1gCXCmKl7f5RPn/fFZCMq1rEkyRAKxhtiI=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; b=Vyss7FI++syospFVyPOgOD6SeQS/FCtPjXwjpW0u/Z2WCxm0I8wdA5feCcsnvjBXtb w4wsEmBgw4qtg0TE+HoKvRGdpcBEoEZPdaLK/hsez0bflZIUE/A1yDRKZNJmNoe9uQuT vL2erFPWFBkbqlYBuk52krtJcTuQzf09Y+KtY=
- 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>
- Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
The current Link Extensions[1] draft says "No IANA actions are required..." however, IANA maintains a registry of link-relations[2] that contains many of the link relations defined previously for use with Atom. Why wouldn't IANA be asked to include these new link relations in the existing registry?
Also, there is a Wiki for HTML5 Link Relations[3] -- some of which come from Atom. Is there any reason it wouldn't be appropriate to include these new link relations in the HTML5 list?
bob wyman
[2] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml