12145 2011-02-21 09:35:29 +0000 define how to resolve conflicting link types 2011-08-04 05:05:37 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified Other other RESOLVED INVALID http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#linkTypes P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian julian.reschke mike philipj public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 45885 0 contributor 2011-02-21 09:35:29 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/links.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#linkTypes Comment: define how to resolve conflicting link types Posted from: 83.218.67.122 45886 1 philipj 2011-02-21 09:43:58 +0000 Hmm, I wanted to write some examples here in response to <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/0345.html>, but all I could come up with in the existing list of keywords is: <link rel="prev" href="foo.html"> <link rel="next" href="foo.html"> It turns out this isn't really a conflict, it would just result in a circular reference of sorts, which is silly but not something implementations need to handle. <link rel="next" href="foo.html"> <link rel="next" href="bar.html"> This is not a conflict between the link types, but rather a question of which document would be navigated to if one follows the "next" button in a browser. That should be defined, but is unrelated to the problem I tried to formulate. 45887 2 julian.reschke 2011-02-21 09:50:22 +0000 Well, link types can express conflicting information. The more types we get, the more likely it gets. That being said, it can happen with multiple <link> elements, but even in a single <a>. In general, I'd call it an authoring mistake, for which UA behavior will be hard to define without actually knowing the link relation. 52959 3 mike 2011-08-04 05:05:37 +0000 mass-moved component to LC1