4 ms·

Yeah, a reference to an external file would be a better way to do it. And HTML5 already has the mechanism for this sort of thing: the <link> element[1] and the

Yeah, a reference to an external file would be a better way to do it. And HTML5 already has the mechanism for this sort of thing: the <link> element[1] and the "rel extensions" registry. [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/semantics.html#the-link-element http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/... [2] http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions

andreyf 16y ago
Uh, doesn't that just add an extra round trip and yet another mandatory HTTP request? No thanks, I think we've enough of those.
- masklinn 16y ago
  > Uh, doesn't that just add an extra round trip and yet another mandatory HTTP request? No. The request only happens if you decide to "pin" the site, or otherwise give it a first-class status on your machine (one could imagine the same by pining it to the OSX dock or making a site into a "standalone app", I think there was a browser doing that a while ago)
  - andreyf 16y ago
    Even worse. That gives first-class status to the "HTML version" which contains links to all of the other "versions" of a webapp.
    - masklinn 16y ago
      > That gives first-class status to the "HTML version" Erm... you make absolutely no sense here? Of course the "HTML version" (aka hello we're talking about web pages here) is the main resource, what else would be, unicorn and ponies?
doty 16y ago
Well, to be fair, HTML5 also already has the <meta> extension mechanism. I know you're not making the argument that one is more "standardsy" than the other; you're just pointing out that both approaches are equally "standard".