scott at randomchaos.com
Wed Nov 1 09:52:56 PST 2006
On Nov 1, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Siegfried Gipp wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 1. November 2006 17:16 schrieb David Osolkowski:
>> You can't use vote-for for this, because vote-for already has defined
>> semantics; it represents a vote that has been cast, not the
>> ability to
>> cast a vote. It's already possible to use vote-for in both rel and
>> rev; one indicates that the current page is a vote for the link
> No, rel is explicitely excluded. And exactly that is what i don't
> think of
> beeing adequate. If there already exists a good semantic for
> that's just fine.
rel="vote-for", by the definition in the HTML spec, can only mean the
reverse of what rev="vote-for" means. It can't mean anything else.
There is already an established meaning for rev="vote-for", and the
reverse of that doesn't really communicate anything useful. There's
an explanation of this here:
>> On page A: <a href="pageB" rel="poll">The page being voted on</a>
>> On page B: <a href="pageA" rev="poll">Vote for this page here</a>
> for">...</a> ?
I believe that means the page containing this link is voting for a
More information about the microformats-discuss