4 ms·
I'm thinking perhaps you could have multiple instances of the tag, each for a different purpose. Most tools would use the first one, but if it's something like
by MicahWedemeyer 14y ago
I'm thinking perhaps you could have multiple instances of the tag, each for a different purpose. Most tools would use the first one, but if it's something like a browser plugin it would just display them all to you and let you choose.
- breckinloggins 14y agoYup. rel="logo-foo" where "foo" is optional and some set of standard subtags. You could even consolidate this so you had rel="logo-favicon" and the favicon just become another aspect of your logo. All that said, I think it's a solution looking for... well, not a "problem" really, because the problem is obvious. Rather, the whole thing seems like a solution to a problem that not enough people have. I'd wager the 2011 proposal would have gotten more traction and some format adopted if this were really a pressing concern. You know what? What I'd like to see is some kind of de facto standard rel="foo" database that, a bit like the WHATWG, kind of becomes a place where you can submit rel types, spec a schema behind it, go through some semi-formal vetting and standardization process, and be able to crawl this information in a semantically-meaningful way (in addition to just researching the different types). It'd also be nice to formalize a migration path from a <link rel="x-foo"> as a prototype declaration to a <link rel="foo"> as a 'standard'. The closest we have to this is probably the HTML spec and WHATWG's page (http://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations http://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-link-relations).
- ricardobeat 14y agoOr http://schema.org/ http://schema.org/