I've been reading the new draft standard of XHTML 2.0, and in the midst of wading through obscure tags that I was shocked to realize have been part of HTML for a decade without ever being used but are still there, was reminded of a couple things we could do:
Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> section, such as: <link title="This article in Swahili" rel="alternate" lang="sw" href="http://sw.wikipedia.org/..." />
And also: <link title="Printable version" rel="alternate" media="print" href="http://....?printable=yes" />
and perhaps: <link title="Wikipedia copyright" rel="copyright" href="http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights" />
Will it have any practical results? I dunno. But it sounds exciting and standards-compliant!
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
(Brion Vibber vibber@aludra.usc.edu):
Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> ...
Well yes, that would be a nice way to encode them, but then they'd only be available to browsers that allowed access to page-level links. Few do, and even those don't make it easy. We already use typed links to point to the page's stylesheet and icon, which some browsers will use and the rest safely ignore; but most other types of links don't have any browser support at all.
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
(Brion Vibber vibber@aludra.usc.edu): Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> ...
Well yes, that would be a nice way to encode them, but then they'd only be available to browsers that allowed access to page-level links. Few do, and even those don't make it easy. We already use typed links to point to the page's stylesheet and icon, which some browsers will use and the rest safely ignore; but most other types of links don't have any browser support at all.
...which means they're safely ignored. So, no change from the present behavior in 99% of cases, and potentially useful support where it is supported.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Wed, 07 May 2003 17:01:11 -0700 (PDT), Brion Vibber vibber@aludra.usc.edu gave utterance to the following:
I've been reading the new draft standard of XHTML 2.0, and in the midst of wading through obscure tags that I was shocked to realize have been part of HTML for a decade without ever being used but are still there, was reminded of a couple things we could do:
Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> section, such as:
<link title="This article in Swahili" rel="alternate" lang="sw" href="http://sw.wikipedia.org/..." />
And also:
<link title="Printable version" rel="alternate" media="print" href="http://....?printable=yes" />
why waste precious capacity generating a different version of the page for printing? A print stylesheet (or an @media section in the main stylesheet) is much more efficient.
and perhaps:
<link title="Wikipedia copyright" rel="copyright" href="http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights" />
Will it have any practical results? I dunno. But it sounds exciting and standards-compliant!
And there are even browsers which support it these days!
On Thu, 8 May 2003, Richard Grevers wrote:
<link title="Printable version" rel="alternate" media="print" href="http://....?printable=yes" />
why waste precious capacity generating a different version of the page for printing? A print stylesheet (or an @media section in the main stylesheet) is much more efficient.
Because we want the poor saps who use real browsers to have a clean, printable version too? :) Of course, if they can use the <link> tag, their mythical browser probably supports @media sections as well.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Wed, 07 May 2003 18:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Brion Vibber vibber@aludra.usc.edu gave utterance to the following:
On Thu, 8 May 2003, Richard Grevers wrote:
<link title="Printable version" rel="alternate" media="print" href="http://....?printable=yes" />
why waste precious capacity generating a different version of the page for printing? A print stylesheet (or an @media section in the main stylesheet) is much more efficient.
Because we want the poor saps who use real browsers to have a clean, printable version too? :) Of course, if they can use the <link> tag, their mythical browser probably supports @media sections as well.
Last time I checked, IE handles print stylesheets and @media just fine. Netscape 4 doesn't do @media, and I think that's the only browser with more than 1% usage that misses out. And I thought that the #1 problem with the internet was that the poor saps are NOT using a real browser :-)
Brion Vibber wrote:
Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> section, such as:
<link title="This article in Swahili" [...] Will it have any practical results? I dunno. But it sounds exciting and standards-compliant!
Some of these link tags are supported by Lynx, for example the previous and next links at the top of a page like
http://www.lysator.liu.se/runeberg/mhausen/0089.html
but I doubt that any other browser (except Opera?) makes use of them, even if they are standard.
On Thu, 8 May 2003 16:38:17 +0200 (CEST), Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se gave utterance to the following:
Brion Vibber wrote:
Interlanguage links should produce <link> tags to go in the <head> section, such as:
<link title="This article in Swahili" [...] Will it have any practical results? I dunno. But it sounds exciting and standards-compliant!
Some of these link tags are supported by Lynx, for example the previous and next links at the top of a page like
http://www.lysator.liu.se/runeberg/mhausen/0089.html
but I doubt that any other browser (except Opera?) makes use of them, even if they are standard.
Opera, Mozilla (and spawn), Icab. Not sure about Safari
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org