Microformats Wiki - User contributions [en]

rel-up

2018-06-23T13:44:41Z

Prlbr: /* Use cases */ fixed Unicode name for ↑

{{stub}}

== Description ==

Refers to a parent document in a hierarchy of documents.

== Example ==

A page (<nowiki>https://prlbr.de/galerie/14/am-pranger/</nowiki>) in a photo gallery showcases a photo. The page defines multiple link relations which refer to the

* '''next''' page which contains the next photo from the gallery
* '''prev'''ious page from the gallery
* parent page using '''up''', which shows previews of many photos as thumbnails including the current one and includes links to their corresponding pages.

<source lang=html4strict>
<link rel='next' href='/galerie/14/mustergatte/'>
<link rel='prev' href='/galerie/14/linie-1/'>
<link rel='up' href='/galerie/seite-6'>
</source>

''next'' and ''prev'' relate to documents on the same hierarchy level while ''up'' moves one level up.

== Use cases ==

Authors can make a hierarchical relationship discoverable, for example between

* a single photo page and a gallery overview page
* a forum thread and a forum
* the archive page for a single month in a blog and the archive page for the whole year
* in software documentation a page about a class and its parent class

This explicit knowledge can improve navigation for users of navigation bars, either browser extension or built-in. Multiple such bars exist and existed in the past. In 2018, at least the SeaMonkey, iCab and Lynx browsers support ''rel=up'' natively. Opera did in the past. Add-ons for previous Firefox versions which used ''rel=up'' included Link Widgets by cdn and Stephen Clavering, Site navigation bar by Klaus Bolwin, cmSiteNavigation Toolbar by Christoph A. Mueller. A LinkBar Add-on for Internet Explorer was available. See <nowiki>http://matthias.gutfeldt.ch/translation/LINK/addendum.html</nowiki> for exotic/historical examples.

Assistive technology (does any today?) could communicate better what a link such as the following means, for example by reading "link to ''parent page'', upwards arrow" instead of just "link, upwards arrow":

<source lang=html4strict><a rel='up' href='..'>↑</a></source>

In the absence of native support for ''rel=up'' and similar link relations (''next'', ''prev'', …) in assistive technology it’s possible to translate the ''rel'' values to a textual description with the ''aria-label'' attribute automatically using a script.

Hierarchical information allows for better sitemaps to be generated automatically by web spiders.
* Web spiders tend to prefer an explicit [[sitemap]] for that use-case. [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

== Standards ==

The link relation ''up'' is recognized in standards:

* IANA link relations registry (<nowiki>https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml</nowiki>)
* XHTML vocabulary (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#up</nowiki>)
** and hence XHTML+RDFa Initial Context (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/xhtml-rdfa-1.1</nowiki>)

<div class="discussion">
* This is good reason to reserve the rel value of "up", but insufficient to make it a standard, since those registries do not require use-cases or implementation, both of which are essential to having a useful standard. - [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
</div>

== History ==

Historically ''up'' has also been in HTML3 (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/dochead.html</nowiki>), but could not be found in later editions of HTML, until its use in practice was recognized during the development of HTML5 (<nowiki>https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations#rel-first</nowiki>) and hence found its way into HTML5 Working Drafts (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/links.html#link-type-up</nowiki>). Then the link relation ''up'' was dropped from HTML5 without prejudice (<nowiki>https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html</nowiki>) for adding it to other future link relation registries – e.g. this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – and recognizing that it is a defined standard anyway due to the IANA registry:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Finally, it was noted that the link relations being dropped are already defined in the IANA registry and could be defined in future registries;</blockquote>

An argument against that decision was that dropping ''up'' from the HTML standard would cause content to show up as invalid in validators and would stop people from using it, which was apparently not the intention when dropping it from the HTML core standard. The counter argument was:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Since validators do not implement relation checking at all yet and are waiting on a registry solution before doing so, this was also a weak objection.</blockquote>

However, once a registry solution was found – i.e. currently this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – the new registry failed to add the link relation ''up'' as valid value and validators started to report it as an error. Unfortunately, this caused multiple software projects to remove ''rel=up'' from software such as content management systems (<nowiki>https://github.com/webdevops/TYPO3-metaseo/commit/71f2e1b492dfa6304024594a0c7c3b5bd6bea3e4</nowiki>), documentation tools (<nowiki>https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/commit/d43259f5f748cd00eba168b54b7b798d3f257911</nowiki>) and bulletin boards (<nowiki>https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=2170174</nowiki>).

== Implementations ==

* https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/link-widgets/
* https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cgddacggfmoggigikjjcogdodjiplibe
* http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
* <nowiki>https://www.drupal.org/project/rel_links</nowiki>

== See Also ==

* [[rel-next]]
* [[rel-faq]]
* [[existing-rel-values]]

rel-up

2018-06-23T13:41:07Z

Prlbr: /* Use cases */ gave an example how assistive technology could use rel=up (don’t know whether this is done in any software today) and how a "polyfill" could work

{{stub}}

== Description ==

Refers to a parent document in a hierarchy of documents.

== Example ==

A page (<nowiki>https://prlbr.de/galerie/14/am-pranger/</nowiki>) in a photo gallery showcases a photo. The page defines multiple link relations which refer to the

* '''next''' page which contains the next photo from the gallery
* '''prev'''ious page from the gallery
* parent page using '''up''', which shows previews of many photos as thumbnails including the current one and includes links to their corresponding pages.

<source lang=html4strict>
<link rel='next' href='/galerie/14/mustergatte/'>
<link rel='prev' href='/galerie/14/linie-1/'>
<link rel='up' href='/galerie/seite-6'>
</source>

''next'' and ''prev'' relate to documents on the same hierarchy level while ''up'' moves one level up.

== Use cases ==

Authors can make a hierarchical relationship discoverable, for example between

* a single photo page and a gallery overview page
* a forum thread and a forum
* the archive page for a single month in a blog and the archive page for the whole year
* in software documentation a page about a class and its parent class

This explicit knowledge can improve navigation for users of navigation bars, either browser extension or built-in. Multiple such bars exist and existed in the past. In 2018, at least the SeaMonkey, iCab and Lynx browsers support ''rel=up'' natively. Opera did in the past. Add-ons for previous Firefox versions which used ''rel=up'' included Link Widgets by cdn and Stephen Clavering, Site navigation bar by Klaus Bolwin, cmSiteNavigation Toolbar by Christoph A. Mueller. A LinkBar Add-on for Internet Explorer was available. See <nowiki>http://matthias.gutfeldt.ch/translation/LINK/addendum.html</nowiki> for exotic/historical examples.

Assistive technology (does any today?) could communicate better what a link such as the following means, for example by reading "link to ''parent page'', arrow up" instead of just "link, arrow up":

<source lang=html4strict><a rel='up' href='..'>↑</a></source>

In the absence of native support for ''rel=up'' and similar link relations (''next'', ''prev'', …) in assistive technology it’s possible to translate the ''rel'' values to a textual description with the ''aria-label'' attribute automatically using a script.

Hierarchical information allows for better sitemaps to be generated automatically by web spiders.
* Web spiders tend to prefer an explicit [[sitemap]] for that use-case. [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

== Standards ==

The link relation ''up'' is recognized in standards:

* IANA link relations registry (<nowiki>https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml</nowiki>)
* XHTML vocabulary (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#up</nowiki>)
** and hence XHTML+RDFa Initial Context (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/xhtml-rdfa-1.1</nowiki>)

<div class="discussion">
* This is good reason to reserve the rel value of "up", but insufficient to make it a standard, since those registries do not require use-cases or implementation, both of which are essential to having a useful standard. - [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
</div>

== History ==

Historically ''up'' has also been in HTML3 (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/dochead.html</nowiki>), but could not be found in later editions of HTML, until its use in practice was recognized during the development of HTML5 (<nowiki>https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations#rel-first</nowiki>) and hence found its way into HTML5 Working Drafts (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/links.html#link-type-up</nowiki>). Then the link relation ''up'' was dropped from HTML5 without prejudice (<nowiki>https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html</nowiki>) for adding it to other future link relation registries – e.g. this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – and recognizing that it is a defined standard anyway due to the IANA registry:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Finally, it was noted that the link relations being dropped are already defined in the IANA registry and could be defined in future registries;</blockquote>

An argument against that decision was that dropping ''up'' from the HTML standard would cause content to show up as invalid in validators and would stop people from using it, which was apparently not the intention when dropping it from the HTML core standard. The counter argument was:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Since validators do not implement relation checking at all yet and are waiting on a registry solution before doing so, this was also a weak objection.</blockquote>

However, once a registry solution was found – i.e. currently this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – the new registry failed to add the link relation ''up'' as valid value and validators started to report it as an error. Unfortunately, this caused multiple software projects to remove ''rel=up'' from software such as content management systems (<nowiki>https://github.com/webdevops/TYPO3-metaseo/commit/71f2e1b492dfa6304024594a0c7c3b5bd6bea3e4</nowiki>), documentation tools (<nowiki>https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/commit/d43259f5f748cd00eba168b54b7b798d3f257911</nowiki>) and bulletin boards (<nowiki>https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=2170174</nowiki>).

== Implementations ==

* https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/link-widgets/
* https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cgddacggfmoggigikjjcogdodjiplibe
* http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
* <nowiki>https://www.drupal.org/project/rel_links</nowiki>

== See Also ==

* [[rel-next]]
* [[rel-faq]]
* [[existing-rel-values]]

rel-up

2018-06-22T22:50:08Z

Prlbr: /* Use cases */ added specific examples of browsers/extensions which improve navigation with rel=up

{{stub}}

== Description ==

Refers to a parent document in a hierarchy of documents.

== Example ==

A page (<nowiki>https://prlbr.de/galerie/14/am-pranger/</nowiki>) in a photo gallery showcases a photo. The page defines multiple link relations which refer to the

* '''next''' page which contains the next photo from the gallery
* '''prev'''ious page from the gallery
* parent page using '''up''', which shows previews of many photos as thumbnails including the current one and includes links to their corresponding pages.

<source lang=html4strict>
<link rel='next' href='/galerie/14/mustergatte/'>
<link rel='prev' href='/galerie/14/linie-1/'>
<link rel='up' href='/galerie/seite-6'>
</source>

''next'' and ''prev'' relate to documents on the same hierarchy level while ''up'' moves one level up.

== Use cases ==

Authors can make a hierarchical relationship discoverable, for example between

* a single photo page and a gallery overview page
* a forum thread and a forum
* the archive page for a single month in a blog and the archive page for the whole year
* in software documentation a page about a class and its parent class

This explicit knowledge can improve navigation for users of navigation bars, either browser extension or built-in. Multiple such bars exist and existed in the past. In 2018, at least the SeaMonkey, iCab and Lynx browsers support ''rel=up'' natively. Opera did in the past. Add-ons for previous Firefox versions which used ''rel=up'' included Link Widgets by cdn and Stephen Clavering, Site navigation bar by Klaus Bolwin, cmSiteNavigation Toolbar by Christoph A. Mueller. A LinkBar Add-on for Internet Explorer was available. See <nowiki>http://matthias.gutfeldt.ch/translation/LINK/addendum.html</nowiki> for exotic/historical examples.

Assistive technology (does any today?) could communicate (what should it say?) better what a link such as the following means:

<source lang=html4strict><a rel='up' href='..'>↑</a></source>

Hierarchical information allows for better sitemaps to be generated automatically by web spiders.
* Web spiders tend to prefer an explicit [[sitemap]] for that use-case. [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

== Standards ==

The link relation ''up'' is recognized in standards:

* IANA link relations registry (<nowiki>https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml</nowiki>)
* XHTML vocabulary (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#up</nowiki>)
** and hence XHTML+RDFa Initial Context (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/xhtml-rdfa-1.1</nowiki>)

<div class="discussion">
* This is good reason to reserve the rel value of "up", but insufficient to make it a standard, since those registries do not require use-cases or implementation, both of which are essential to having a useful standard. - [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 22:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
</div>

== History ==

Historically ''up'' has also been in HTML3 (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/dochead.html</nowiki>), but could not be found in later editions of HTML, until its use in practice was recognized during the development of HTML5 (<nowiki>https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations#rel-first</nowiki>) and hence found its way into HTML5 Working Drafts (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/links.html#link-type-up</nowiki>). Then the link relation ''up'' was dropped from HTML5 without prejudice (<nowiki>https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html</nowiki>) for adding it to other future link relation registries – e.g. this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – and recognizing that it is a defined standard anyway due to the IANA registry:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Finally, it was noted that the link relations being dropped are already defined in the IANA registry and could be defined in future registries;</blockquote>

An argument against that decision was that dropping ''up'' from the HTML standard would cause content to show up as invalid in validators and would stop people from using it, which was apparently not the intention when dropping it from the HTML core standard. The counter argument was:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Since validators do not implement relation checking at all yet and are waiting on a registry solution before doing so, this was also a weak objection.</blockquote>

However, once a registry solution was found – i.e. currently this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – the new registry failed to add the link relation ''up'' as valid value and validators started to report it as an error. Unfortunately, this caused multiple software projects to remove ''rel=up'' from software such as content management systems (<nowiki>https://github.com/webdevops/TYPO3-metaseo/commit/71f2e1b492dfa6304024594a0c7c3b5bd6bea3e4</nowiki>), documentation tools (<nowiki>https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/commit/d43259f5f748cd00eba168b54b7b798d3f257911</nowiki>) and bulletin boards (<nowiki>https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=2170174</nowiki>).

== Implementations ==

* https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/link-widgets/
* https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cgddacggfmoggigikjjcogdodjiplibe
* http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
* <nowiki>https://www.drupal.org/project/rel_links</nowiki>

== See Also ==

* [[rel-next]]
* [[rel-faq]]
* [[existing-rel-values]]

rel-up

2018-06-20T15:13:40Z

Prlbr: added possible use cases

{{stub}}

== Description ==

Refers to a parent document in a hierarchy of documents.

== Example ==

A page (<nowiki>https://prlbr.de/galerie/14/am-pranger/</nowiki>) in a photo gallery showcases a photo. The page defines multiple link relations which refer to the

* '''next''' page which contains the next photo from the gallery
* '''prev'''ious page from the gallery
* parent page using '''up''', which shows previews of many photos as thumbnails including the current one and includes links to their corresponding pages.

<source lang=html4strict>
<link rel='next' href='/galerie/14/mustergatte/'>
<link rel='prev' href='/galerie/14/linie-1/'>
<link rel='up' href='/galerie/seite-6'>
</source>

''next'' and ''prev'' relate to documents on the same hierarchy level while ''up'' moves one level up.

== Use cases ==

Authors can make a hierarchical relationship machine-readable, for example between

* a single photo page and a gallery overview page
* a forum thread and a forum
* the archive page for a single month in a blog and the archive page for the whole year
* in software documentation a page about a class and its parent class

This can improve navigation for users of navigation bars, either browser extension or built-in. Multiple such bars exist and existed in the past. Assistive technology could communicate better what a link such as the following means:

<source lang=html4strict><a rel='up' href='..'>↑</a></source>

Hierarchical information allows for better sitemaps to be generated automatically by web spiders.

== Standards ==

The link relation ''up'' is recognized in standards:

* IANA link relations registry (<nowiki>https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml</nowiki>)
* XHTML vocabulary (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#up</nowiki>)
** and hence XHTML+RDFa Initial Context (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/xhtml-rdfa-1.1</nowiki>)

== History ==

Historically ''up'' has also been in HTML3 (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/dochead.html</nowiki>), but could not be found in later editions of HTML, until its use in practice was recognized during the development of HTML5 (<nowiki>https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations#rel-first</nowiki>) and hence found its way into HTML5 Working Drafts (<nowiki>https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/links.html#link-type-up</nowiki>). Then the link relation ''up'' was dropped from HTML5 without prejudice (<nowiki>https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html</nowiki>) for adding it to other future link relation registries – e.g. this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – and recognizing that it is a defined standard anyway due to the IANA registry:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Finally, it was noted that the link relations being dropped are already defined in the IANA registry and could be defined in future registries;</blockquote>

An argument against that decision was that dropping ''up'' from the HTML standard would cause content to show up as invalid in validators and would stop people from using it, which was apparently not the intention when dropping it from the HTML core standard. The counter argument was:

<blockquote cite="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/att-0481/issue-118-decision.html">Since validators do not implement relation checking at all yet and are waiting on a registry solution before doing so, this was also a weak objection.</blockquote>

However, once a registry solution was found – i.e. currently this [[existing-rel-values|this microformats WIKI]] – the new registry failed to add the link relation ''up'' as valid value and validators started to report it as an error. Unfortunately, this caused multiple software projects to remove ''rel=up'' from software such as content management systems (<nowiki>https://github.com/webdevops/TYPO3-metaseo/commit/71f2e1b492dfa6304024594a0c7c3b5bd6bea3e4</nowiki>), documentation tools (<nowiki>https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/commit/d43259f5f748cd00eba168b54b7b798d3f257911</nowiki>) and bulletin boards (<nowiki>https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=2170174</nowiki>).

== Implementations ==

* https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/link-widgets/
* https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cgddacggfmoggigikjjcogdodjiplibe
* http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
* <nowiki>https://www.drupal.org/project/rel_links</nowiki>

== See Also ==

* [[rel-next]]
* [[rel-faq]]
* [[existing-rel-values]]

rel-up

2018-06-20T14:38:11Z

Prlbr: added some historical notes (the wiki doesn’t let me post external links, so I put the URLs into <nowiki> tags)

rel-up

2018-06-20T14:28:02Z

Prlbr: added standards that define rel=up and an implementation (the wiki doesn’t let me post an external link, so I put the URL into <nowiki> tags)

rel-up

2018-06-20T14:19:40Z

Prlbr: added short description, example (the wiki doesn’t let me post an external link, so I put the URL into <nowiki> tags)