rel-license-issues: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
(→Issues) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*# ''Issue H-1: This specification is lacking a user agent conformance section. There's basically nothing that says how rel=license must be handled. | *# ''Issue H-1: This specification is lacking a user agent conformance section. There's basically nothing that says how rel=license must be handled. | ||
*# ''Issue H-2: What's the point of rel="license"? | *# ''Issue H-2: What's the point of rel="license"? | ||
* 2005-12-09 raised by Kenny Heaton | |||
*# ''There needs to be an explicit explanation of when to use rel-license which "Indicates that the referred resource is a license for the referring page.", and when to use the W3C defined copyright link type which "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." since copyright and licensing are similar concepts and can be confused. | |||
Revision as of 22:23, 9 December 2005
Issues
- 2005-06-21 raised by Hixie
- Issue H-1: This specification is lacking a user agent conformance section. There's basically nothing that says how rel=license must be handled.
- Issue H-2: What's the point of rel="license"?
- 2005-12-09 raised by Kenny Heaton
- There needs to be an explicit explanation of when to use rel-license which "Indicates that the referred resource is a license for the referring page.", and when to use the W3C defined copyright link type which "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." since copyright and licensing are similar concepts and can be confused.