Subject: Link Extensions and IANA, W3C?

From: Bob Wyman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:22:23 -0400

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

[1] http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-snell-atompub-link-extensions-05.txt
[2] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
[3] http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 11:07:31 -0600

On 6/7/10 9:22 AM, Bob Wyman wrote:
> 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
> 

My understanding is that the new IANA registry is intended to be the
canonical location for this information, as specified by
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-http-link-header/
(approved for publication as an RFC).

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/