Re: Link REL and REV: NAME, NAMES, or CDATA?

Murray Maloney (murray@sco.COM)
Fri, 24 Mar 95 09:01:32 EST

Thank you for mentioning this.

My opinion: use NAMES not CDATA.

Registration should be through W3C or IETF.


> There is one inconsistency that I need to ask about now.
> In Section 2.8.3 in the paragraph under REL:
> ... The attribute value is a comma-separated list of relationship
> values. Values and their semantics will be registered by the
> HTML registration authority.
> but, the DTD says:
> <!ENTITY % linkType "NAME"
> -- a list of these will be specified at a later date -->
> <!ENTITY % linkExtraAttributes
> "REL %linkType #IMPLIED
> REV %linkType #IMPLIED
> ...
> A "comma-separated list" is clearly not going to fit in a NAME.
> However, the list is what was defined in the original WWW design
> notes, and I think multiple relations per link is still desired.
> Therefore, we can either change it to a whitespace separated list:
> <!ENTITY % linkType "NAMES">
> or stick with the original comma-separated list:
> <!ENTITY % linkType "CDATA">
> What's it going to be?
> Also, note the reference to an "HTML registration authority".
> We need to define this (the same is true for HTTP). Since the link
> names have more to do with the overall hypertext relationship model,
> I think the registry will have to be at W3C. Therefore, we should ask
> someone at W3C (Dan? Dave?) to set up a registry and a semi-permanent
> URL to which the spec can point.
> ....Roy T. Fielding Department of ICS, University of California, Irvine USA
> <>
> <URL:>