From derhoermi@gmx.net Wed Jun 1 15:19:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E25AE091C for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:19:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.062 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.062 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.462, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0YJRmFYPFS0r for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 78C52E09AE for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Jun 2011 22:18:48 -0000 Received: from dslb-094-223-193-161.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.193.161] by mail.gmx.net (mp039) with SMTP; 02 Jun 2011 00:18:48 +0200 X-Authenticated: #723575 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/5r2ltRxf5XyN5zVd90gNePucW60vjrEt8E+YwnL zWtkmm18b8mNgr From: Bjoern Hoehrmann To: Julian Reschke Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 00:18:56 +0200 Message-ID: <7iddu6hjj1u9n4bt8fg4l1fll6m3u00jmv@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> References: <4DBDBDE3.7060502@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4DBDBDE3.7060502@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:19:18 -0000 * Julian Reschke wrote: >On 01.05.2011 19:34, Frank Ellermann wrote: >> On 2011-04-15 I posted "NEW RELATION - canonical", and one day later I >> amended it by >> s/similar similar/similar/. After two weeks that's now an "ETMO" >> (error time out), and >> RFC 5988 offers no default accept or reject rule. >> ... > >I did answer in >, >right? > >That being said, I totally agree this is moving too slowly. You said that a month ago, where the request was already two weeks old. In your answer you only asked a question; as far as I can tell none of the designated experts have so far approved or denied the request. So, "Within at most 14 days of the request, the Designated Expert(s) will either approve or deny the registration request" does not seem true. I, well, I am mostly wondering why anyone would have thought it a good idea to make this promise in the specification. Any thoughts on that? Keeping in mind that this promise has been broken several times, as far as I can tell. (I think it is an unreasonable requirement and am looking for what to tell the next person who proposes such a requirement so they abandon the idea early on, I don't really care about how many days it takes to register a link relation; in this instance, people could just have said they want Approve or Deny _now_ and I do think they would have gotten that timely, but dealing in such absolutes often leads to unhappiness.) -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ From julian.reschke@gmx.de Wed Jun 1 15:27:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B219E072C for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:27:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.027 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.428, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cUVibExi38dF for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:27:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 65AB4E06D1 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Jun 2011 22:27:45 -0000 Received: from p508FA928.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.169.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp011) with SMTP; 02 Jun 2011 00:27:45 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+5AxZ99O6554NWepPsecO9/KNzr3Dhc2XCgWW6gb 71qeCuQeNeOaQY Message-ID: <4DE6BCD5.2040602@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 00:27:33 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjoern Hoehrmann References: <4DBDBDE3.7060502@gmx.de> <7iddu6hjj1u9n4bt8fg4l1fll6m3u00jmv@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> In-Reply-To: <7iddu6hjj1u9n4bt8fg4l1fll6m3u00jmv@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:27:50 -0000 On 2011-06-02 00:18, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 01.05.2011 19:34, Frank Ellermann wrote: >>> On 2011-04-15 I posted "NEW RELATION - canonical", and one day later I >>> amended it by >>> s/similar similar/similar/. After two weeks that's now an "ETMO" >>> (error time out), and >>> RFC 5988 offers no default accept or reject rule. >>> ... >> >> I did answer in >> , >> right? >> >> That being said, I totally agree this is moving too slowly. > > You said that a month ago, where the request was already two weeks old. > In your answer you only asked a question; as far as I can tell none of > the designated experts have so far approved or denied the request. So, > "Within at most 14 days of the request, the Designated Expert(s) will > either approve or deny the registration request" does not seem true. I, > well, I am mostly wondering why anyone would have thought it a good idea > to make this promise in the specification. Any thoughts on that? Keeping > in mind that this promise has been broken several times, as far as I can > tell. > > (I think it is an unreasonable requirement and am looking for what to > tell the next person who proposes such a requirement so they abandon the > idea early on, I don't really care about how many days it takes to > register a link relation; in this instance, people could just have said > they want Approve or Deny _now_ and I do think they would have gotten > that timely, but dealing in such absolutes often leads to unhappiness.) I agree with you that it's an unreasonable requirement. I'm also forwarding this message to the people who've been working on the spec, but haven't submitted anything yet... Best regards, Julian From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Fri Jun 3 13:02:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90295E06BF for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:02:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tk4dvbbikq4g for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEEBEE07AA for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so1048478pzk.31 for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:02:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7oPdlKaijBPr1WEseFN8OgQbuNLg9LKJulO1qirLlKY=; b=aBQBmbHWggldTzwNpPKvH3rqXWD06e2h3XWG+3ipbnMrOid2xXVuDBs8eVXdsbpPE9 7t6gjR1HDKtnmPH91Tsc5drHsmuwJMP7mHxTMNmXZKUUnocDw7ILtDL0YmOkVa20cLD7 KkYszq2UodMlTHbM3UVeQs6Hd7+3PONKPatoc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=L0A29qlfcr+zk+7Q8Ej1wjg3ILFqvB1HeLrSWqwVh4YUbio5GMKnSTM0Av2kyLbOwW WduEtMVfcmUmdIq4YZaGtP8KiEoICkZlsa6DRycPUTD5ytDK84fWr3nEfpKh1viRU+7B hAj05fUvSUxXTMvDRNHKZfuHXYv/iOalbiMw0= Received: by 10.142.61.9 with SMTP id j9mr327465wfa.416.1307131335403; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:02:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.165.5 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:01:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DE6BCD5.2040602@gmx.de> References: <4DBDBDE3.7060502@gmx.de> <7iddu6hjj1u9n4bt8fg4l1fll6m3u00jmv@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <4DE6BCD5.2040602@gmx.de> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 22:01:55 +0200 Message-ID: To: link-relations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:02:16 -0000 On 2 June 2011 00:27, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> I did answer in >>> , >>> right? Sorry, I sent a reply only as PM back in April, just in case repeated here: |> we do have people at Google looking into writing a |> "proper" spec | | Just in case I posted a pointer in the "webmaster help" | forum (*). | |> maybe you are willing to assist them, given your IETF |>know-how? | | But you don't want the rel=3D"canonical" registration | in 2016... ;-) If somebody writes an RFC its IANA | considerations could update a registration. You're | not forced to wait for that; above all don't hold | your breath. IOW, I think the relation should be registered now, and I'm waiting for a "reject" or "accept" decision (seven weeks now). The appeal sent to the APPS-AD address apparently didn't make it, that could be a problem with the forwarding on the tools server. [Bj=F6rn wrote:] >> I am mostly wondering why anyone would have thought >> it a good idea to make this promise in the >> specification. Any thoughts on that? A review timeout is a good idea, the language tags list has a similar rule. Years ago on the charsets list without clear timeout it took months until folks were sure that the expert did not more read the list. -Frank From stpeter@stpeter.im Fri Jun 3 13:36:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEBAE07D4 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:36:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.579 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PUoF-pq1+Ig2 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA38E07AB for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-158.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-158.cisco.com [64.101.72.158]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 18F8740046; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:36:40 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 14:36:38 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms080500050908070306060100" Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:36:42 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms080500050908070306060100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 4/15/11 12:29 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 15.04.2011 20:09, Frank Ellermann wrote: >> Relation Name: canonical >> Description: A "canonical" URI is the preferred version of a set of >> URIs >> with highly similar content. It is intended to help >> search >> engines when the same or highly similar similar >> content is >> available at different URIs. >> Reference: About rel=3D"canonical" >> =20 >> http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=3D139394= >> Notes: In = and >> the >> authors >> state that Ask, Bing, Google, and Yahoo supported >> canonical >> URIs as of February, 2009. >=20 > Frank, >=20 > we do have people at Google looking into writing a "proper" spec -- > maybe you are willing to assist them, given your IETF know-how? I'd be happy to sponsor the old spec if someone can volunteer to work on = it: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations-01.txt It is very short and quite complete, so I think it would be easy to move this forward. Peter --=20 Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ --------------ms080500050908070306060100 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIITzjCC BjQwggQcoAMCAQICASMwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQELBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoT DVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxKTAnBgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3 MTAyNDIxMDMzM1oXDTE3MTAyNDIxMDMzM1owgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1T dGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAzIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENs aWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALmjSW4SPiDKlAinvVeL ZOVfItiuP1aRHL530E7QUc9icCwL33+PH+Js1HAh8CgWFl34sOxx1FJyS/C4VLPRsqDfP72j tzCVUAL0DAxZ7wgzQvFz7x61jGxfhYhqYb1+PPOLkYBbkRIrPMg3dLEdKmXIYJYXDH+mB/V/ jLo73/Kb7h/rNoNg/oHHSv5Jolyvp5IY2btfcTBfW/telEFj5rDTX2juTvZ3Qhf3XQX5ca3Q 7A10zrUV/cWJOJ7F5RltbEIaboZmX5JBUb3FhUiAdBotehAX6DbDOuYoJtVxmGof6GuVGcPo 98K4TJf8FHo+UA9EOVDp/W7fCqKT4sXk/XkCAwEAAaOCAa0wggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMB Af8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBR7iZySlyShhEcCy3T8LvSs3DLl8zAfBgNV HSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRaMFgwJwYIKwYBBQUH MAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYhaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20v c2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQELBQADggIBAGpd SbdLFMhirxK37V4gE00+uW74UdAXtDgQI3AsRZWtaRtKHgAxFBSteqz4kDkeAjH/1b+K8tQR 6cxSI2nho7qOaPW/UpzOfSS/MeKK/9vfM2lfs+uItXH7LWtvS9wD1erfH1a+BXHCrCp4LA1l fADDhRIiGTSS3i0Zu5xV3INNRHrCCCl6patltQ8RZTqzDMri7ombgIxjN51Zo7xV77EZcThV 0GA8iIN+7T53uHhUJpjfLIztHs/69OclRvHux9hCflfOm7GY5Sc4nqjfES+5XPArGGWiQSEk ez37QfXqsxO3oCHK4b3DFZysG4uyOuC/WL80ab3muQ3tgwjBhq0D3JZN5kvu5gSuNZPa1WrV hEgXkd6C7s5stqB6/htVpshG08jRz9DEutGM9oKQ1ncTivbfPNx7pILoHWvvT7N5i/puVoNu bPUmLXh/2wA6wzAzuuoONiIL14Xpw6jLSnqpaLWElo2yTIFZ/CU/nCvvpW1Dj1457P3Ci9bD 0RPkWSR+CuucpgxrEmaw4UOLxflzuYYaq1RJwygOO5K0s2bAWOcXpgteyUOnQ3d/EjJAWRri 2v0ubiq+4H3KUOMlbznlPAY/1T8YyyJPM88+Ueahe/AW1zoUwZayNcTnuM7cq6yBV8Wr3GOI LFXhtT0UVuJLChPMJKVKVsa7qNorlLkMMIIGxzCCBa+gAwIBAgICAIswDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEF BQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJT ZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBD bGFzcyAzIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0xMDEwMTQwMTM2MzRa Fw0xMjEwMTQxMjAxMDdaMIHAMSAwHgYDVQQNExcyNzQ1ODEtOU5YMDRxeExEYjBvNDY5VDEL MAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxLDAqBgNV BAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRowGAYDVQQDExFQZXRl ciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBldGVyLmltMIIBIjAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAuERvnrkpQTx9wbJfgxbNKEYvt0IilecZRUM6 wrbCzIUPCocuYhaAJcQoqIyHaKybPQ7f+DIGIAolAa3dHnNdlsXP2smTft/ZNpj10PIG5bil NAqLUYwmLJaEaqY7BMW8423U3blW43/luLJk/Pq4OsWcw7AK3LeVh1U/HOgqhin26N3h72X1 nbLEpZFrgcp8egmWtXLCbLBDMqUK3j6wjLldni79muzYEVqU0A5GqSeb8Wc4kIx8VI5yL24J KzinG2iVRP5ZDEbOZETzBXJabUsV56XSxqPG9DK6ke+ybCiL/wKV1HFqdtFB1y25lfvHgOP2 gyEApBKEDNjgLmKyyQIDAQABo4IC+zCCAvcwCQYDVR0TBAIwADALBgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYD VR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBS2EW2iNB+g0EibKJLBdv8I eLovVDAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBR7iZySlyShhEcCy3T8LvSs3DLl8zAdBgNVHREEFjAUgRJzdHBl dGVyQHN0cGV0ZXIuaW0wggFCBgNVHSAEggE5MIIBNTCCATEGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIBIDAu BggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEF BQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBtwYIKwYB BQUHAgIwgaowFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGRTGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHNl ZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmlj YXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5IFBvbGljeSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNz bC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjBjBgNVHR8EXDBaMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3Ns LmNvbS9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMIGOBggrBgEFBQcBAQSBgTB/MDkGCCsGAQUFBzABhi1odHRwOi8vb2NzcC5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vc3ViL2NsYXNzMy9jbGllbnQvY2EwQgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGNmh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NlcnRzL3N1Yi5jbGFzczMuY2xpZW50LmNhLmNydDAjBgNVHRIE HDAahhhodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBADVtbXJG tKAr55xc/OUM546gXUybI72Bank0w739Mv+9BBNtq9rMEvCnLmSKhBi76c1mdXh6zXs8RQDo 6nR/aPabE3llF2T4z80smi9jfnl3y9dpu9TcgDoqDLZ7a2lBlW656XAAQzHjvLp2MC7/mxlg PYH2axa+q40mAYM20GbNsAEGbWQT1IqIh0BcLLsgbaMJHbyG/57zd9JLyMX3Vry1L1fJRQr3 GeLxMV5RtxN+mBgxrwFz/cOc09COiFExlsHgekpB5O43gqsAU16MXypyoSt4MrSfKTMHIGx6 2RF/M6vqUlvhi28gk2ZUvQ/+OX5+gjcZyooEzAAn4RuOKNswggbHMIIFr6ADAgECAgIAizAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4x KzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMT L1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBMB4XDTEw MTAxNDAxMzYzNFoXDTEyMTAxNDEyMDEwN1owgcAxIDAeBgNVBA0TFzI3NDU4MS05TlgwNHF4 TERiMG80NjlUMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8GA1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRl bnZlcjEsMCoGA1UECxMjU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBNZW1iZXIxGjAY BgNVBAMTEVBldGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJzdHBldGVyQHN0cGV0 ZXIuaW0wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQC4RG+euSlBPH3Bsl+DFs0o Ri+3QiKV5xlFQzrCtsLMhQ8Khy5iFoAlxCiojIdorJs9Dt/4MgYgCiUBrd0ec12Wxc/ayZN+ 39k2mPXQ8gbluKU0CotRjCYsloRqpjsExbzjbdTduVbjf+W4smT8+rg6xZzDsArct5WHVT8c 6CqGKfbo3eHvZfWdssSlkWuBynx6CZa1csJssEMypQrePrCMuV2eLv2a7NgRWpTQDkapJ5vx ZziQjHxUjnIvbgkrOKcbaJVE/lkMRs5kRPMFclptSxXnpdLGo8b0MrqR77JsKIv/ApXUcWp2 0UHXLbmV+8eA4/aDIQCkEoQM2OAuYrLJAgMBAAGjggL7MIIC9zAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1Ud DwQEAwIEsDAdBgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFLYRbaI0 H6DQSJsoksF2/wh4ui9UMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFHuJnJKXJKGERwLLdPwu9KzcMuXzMB0GA1Ud EQQWMBSBEnN0cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCAUIGA1UdIASCATkwggE1MIIBMQYLKwYBBAGB tTcBAgIwggEgMC4GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9wb2xpY3ku cGRmMDQGCCsGAQUFBwIBFihodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9pbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUu cGRmMIG3BggrBgEFBQcCAjCBqjAUFg1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMAMCAQEagZFMaW1pdGVkIExp YWJpbGl0eSwgc2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRD b20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8v d3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGMGA1UdHwRcMFowK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUzLWNybC5jcmwwK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRz c2wuY29tL2NydHUzLWNybC5jcmwwgY4GCCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcw AoY2aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY2VydHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy5jbGllbnQuY2Eu Y3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEANW1tcka0oCvnnFz85QznjqBdTJsjvYFqeTTDvf0y/70EE22r2swS8KcuZIqEGLvp zWZ1eHrNezxFAOjqdH9o9psTeWUXZPjPzSyaL2N+eXfL12m71NyAOioMtntraUGVbrnpcABD MeO8unYwLv+bGWA9gfZrFr6rjSYBgzbQZs2wAQZtZBPUioiHQFwsuyBtowkdvIb/nvN30kvI xfdWvLUvV8lFCvcZ4vExXlG3E36YGDGvAXP9w5zT0I6IUTGWweB6SkHk7jeCqwBTXoxfKnKh K3gytJ8pMwcgbHrZEX8zq+pSW+GLbyCTZlS9D/45fn6CNxnKigTMACfhG44o2zGCA80wggPJ AgEBMIGTMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UE CxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRD b20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAgCLMAkGBSsOAwIa BQCgggIOMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTExMDYw MzIwMzYzOFowIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFKpmtx4x2e5hRwgTDm2SZoZ6Vv0VMF8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJDzFSMFAwCwYJYIZIAWUDBAECMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggq hkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDCBpAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGWMIGT MIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2Vj dXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xh c3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAgCLMIGmBgsqhkiG9w0BCRAC CzGBlqCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNV BAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0 Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgIAizANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAASCAQA2CHI6JCT+qVysUVoFmIMelXMcG4lMlLMcqBySweyB51xm9SGKerO9IxK0 4b5AAmGXLGd/4nVgfH+4PenQke1mK8GdqN1BDEgTMsQbK6zQ0bMgKKW/ju+OsJzbfAURgO9b dQQJtDv6vfTWKK/iVZC61xLHDXz6wxpJpjGTmaw9B66Mud/Em0m7VBu2ORqt2JpjFlqIx/U+ QwqpWfynCcWRDulq0bey3WzbBYQZHMJWI6h1zyk92KHMu6PQBf4eEs3RbyTV/RLJxdSveEpe KnLtBs+K+2ve70/GWUpoMSc6ybU1TZ03tpSOweLuqZfuwGOf+/vNXrDG2oZPlEtyZYuYAAAA AAAA --------------ms080500050908070306060100-- From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Fri Jun 3 14:27:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA26E07E2 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:27:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fnrdxunjCZn for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:27:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9FF3E07D4 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:27:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so1076229pzk.31 for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 14:27:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=ZdwBW3yZN+XSgZcHAeeqay4NorvE0CtXKt6VpH2BVKs=; b=M1l3BlPFgYEw7RCKKz+4NeuWFEdcUEMaeoWd3Wg5VQvv+t2Na2SWgHzO2KW+gs2rhI lAo8WNv0IavGFN+sUjP+ahELEuBCc4+XUfdk7D9wapLRFcMfDtNg+jNaWbIwlm7fuO0J MEYvNn/lAdNZLBNWle3hVimVWjpr3gMyOIzUY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=T+2AM5C4htn/WiELFNMISqPcgxX1AetBL5Nok/mnVkLtKAaREhd+tHiWLMOye0QlfW GX6MvH9kDhMnpCo3jA3E4QCvy6WaFdLDTaCzC7HpssR5jrJeLl2boNNWZDjaaouOUTZW bl3GEr6z6Tp9BWVqFRU/PeRBzNTvTu+2nIkWQ= Received: by 10.68.27.100 with SMTP id s4mr1043364pbg.491.1307136470300; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 14:27:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.165.5 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:27:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 23:27:30 +0200 Message-ID: To: link-relations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 21:27:55 -0000 On 3 June 2011 22:36, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > I'd be happy to sponsor the old spec if someone can > volunteer to work on it: [... about I-D.johnston-addressing-link-relations ...] > It is very short and quite complete, so I think it > would be easy to move this forward. Not short enough from my POV: We already have "self" and "bookmark". The name "permalink" is much better than "bookmark", but unless I miss the point it would be the same relation. And two names for one relation would be a bad thing. Actually I have the same problem with "canonical" and "self", is this the same relation, and if not, what is the difference? OTOH "canonical" is widely used, and has a clear definition, therefore it should be registered. No redundancy issues with "mirror" and "shortlink", but admittedly I don't see how applications are supposed to use these relations. So far for the sponsored draft, I'm certainly not hot about it. But it can take years until an RFC is ready. So why not register "canonical" as is *now*, and if an RFC later offers a better specification later it can simply update the registration? [RFC 5988 section 6.2.1] | relation types can be registered by third parties, | if the Designated Expert determines that an | unregistered relation type is widely deployed and | not likely to be registered in a timely manner. It is "widely deployed", so what does "timely" mean? Clearly search engines will continue to do their job with or without registration of "canonical", with or without an RFC. Only folks looking into the registry for "canonical" and finding nothing (at the moment) are a potential problem, if they also miss... http://lmgtfy.com/?q=link+rel+canonical&l=1 If they invent a completely new successful relation with name "canonical" RFC it would be seriously bad. I'm not really worried about this, but I don't like incomplete or outdated IANA registries. -Frank From stpeter@stpeter.im Fri Jun 3 14:37:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 706AEE07EE for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:37:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.579 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e3iiXkGWgqeY for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93FBFE07D4 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-158.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-158.cisco.com [64.101.72.158]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA2B9400A6; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 15:36:58 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 15:36:57 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Ellermann References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms060806020906010204030108" Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 21:37:00 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms060806020906010204030108 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 6/3/11 3:27 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote: > So far for the sponsored draft, I'm certainly not hot > about it. But it can take years until an RFC is ready. It certainly shouldn't in this case! > So why not register "canonical" as is *now*, and if an > RFC later offers a better specification later it can > simply update the registration? > > [RFC 5988 section 6.2.1] > | relation types can be registered by third parties, > | if the Designated Expert determines that an > | unregistered relation type is widely deployed and > | not likely to be registered in a timely manner. >=20 > It is "widely deployed", so what does "timely" mean? > Clearly search engines will continue to do their job > with or without registration of "canonical", with or > without an RFC. >=20 > Only folks looking into the registry for "canonical" > and finding nothing (at the moment) are a potential > problem, if they also miss... >=20 > http://lmgtfy.com/?q=3Dlink+rel+canonical&l=3D1 >=20 > If they invent a completely new successful relation > with name "canonical" RFC it would be seriously bad. >=20 > I'm not really worried about this, but I don't like > incomplete or outdated IANA registries. The Designated Experts are: Mark Nottingham, Eran Hammer-Lehav, Julian Reschke Julian posted earlier on this list that it would be nice to have a spec, but I leave it up to the DEs whether a link to a blog post is acceptable, i.e.: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical= =2Ehtml Peter --=20 Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ --------------ms060806020906010204030108 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIITzjCC BjQwggQcoAMCAQICASMwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQELBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoT DVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxKTAnBgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3 MTAyNDIxMDMzM1oXDTE3MTAyNDIxMDMzM1owgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1T dGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAzIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENs aWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALmjSW4SPiDKlAinvVeL ZOVfItiuP1aRHL530E7QUc9icCwL33+PH+Js1HAh8CgWFl34sOxx1FJyS/C4VLPRsqDfP72j tzCVUAL0DAxZ7wgzQvFz7x61jGxfhYhqYb1+PPOLkYBbkRIrPMg3dLEdKmXIYJYXDH+mB/V/ jLo73/Kb7h/rNoNg/oHHSv5Jolyvp5IY2btfcTBfW/telEFj5rDTX2juTvZ3Qhf3XQX5ca3Q 7A10zrUV/cWJOJ7F5RltbEIaboZmX5JBUb3FhUiAdBotehAX6DbDOuYoJtVxmGof6GuVGcPo 98K4TJf8FHo+UA9EOVDp/W7fCqKT4sXk/XkCAwEAAaOCAa0wggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMB Af8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBR7iZySlyShhEcCy3T8LvSs3DLl8zAfBgNV HSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRaMFgwJwYIKwYBBQUH MAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYhaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20v c2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQELBQADggIBAGpd SbdLFMhirxK37V4gE00+uW74UdAXtDgQI3AsRZWtaRtKHgAxFBSteqz4kDkeAjH/1b+K8tQR 6cxSI2nho7qOaPW/UpzOfSS/MeKK/9vfM2lfs+uItXH7LWtvS9wD1erfH1a+BXHCrCp4LA1l fADDhRIiGTSS3i0Zu5xV3INNRHrCCCl6patltQ8RZTqzDMri7ombgIxjN51Zo7xV77EZcThV 0GA8iIN+7T53uHhUJpjfLIztHs/69OclRvHux9hCflfOm7GY5Sc4nqjfES+5XPArGGWiQSEk ez37QfXqsxO3oCHK4b3DFZysG4uyOuC/WL80ab3muQ3tgwjBhq0D3JZN5kvu5gSuNZPa1WrV hEgXkd6C7s5stqB6/htVpshG08jRz9DEutGM9oKQ1ncTivbfPNx7pILoHWvvT7N5i/puVoNu bPUmLXh/2wA6wzAzuuoONiIL14Xpw6jLSnqpaLWElo2yTIFZ/CU/nCvvpW1Dj1457P3Ci9bD 0RPkWSR+CuucpgxrEmaw4UOLxflzuYYaq1RJwygOO5K0s2bAWOcXpgteyUOnQ3d/EjJAWRri 2v0ubiq+4H3KUOMlbznlPAY/1T8YyyJPM88+Ueahe/AW1zoUwZayNcTnuM7cq6yBV8Wr3GOI LFXhtT0UVuJLChPMJKVKVsa7qNorlLkMMIIGxzCCBa+gAwIBAgICAIswDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEF BQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJT ZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBD bGFzcyAzIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0xMDEwMTQwMTM2MzRa Fw0xMjEwMTQxMjAxMDdaMIHAMSAwHgYDVQQNExcyNzQ1ODEtOU5YMDRxeExEYjBvNDY5VDEL MAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxLDAqBgNV BAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRowGAYDVQQDExFQZXRl ciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBldGVyLmltMIIBIjAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAuERvnrkpQTx9wbJfgxbNKEYvt0IilecZRUM6 wrbCzIUPCocuYhaAJcQoqIyHaKybPQ7f+DIGIAolAa3dHnNdlsXP2smTft/ZNpj10PIG5bil NAqLUYwmLJaEaqY7BMW8423U3blW43/luLJk/Pq4OsWcw7AK3LeVh1U/HOgqhin26N3h72X1 nbLEpZFrgcp8egmWtXLCbLBDMqUK3j6wjLldni79muzYEVqU0A5GqSeb8Wc4kIx8VI5yL24J KzinG2iVRP5ZDEbOZETzBXJabUsV56XSxqPG9DK6ke+ybCiL/wKV1HFqdtFB1y25lfvHgOP2 gyEApBKEDNjgLmKyyQIDAQABo4IC+zCCAvcwCQYDVR0TBAIwADALBgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYD VR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBS2EW2iNB+g0EibKJLBdv8I eLovVDAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBR7iZySlyShhEcCy3T8LvSs3DLl8zAdBgNVHREEFjAUgRJzdHBl dGVyQHN0cGV0ZXIuaW0wggFCBgNVHSAEggE5MIIBNTCCATEGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIBIDAu BggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEF BQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBtwYIKwYB BQUHAgIwgaowFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGRTGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHNl ZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmlj YXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5IFBvbGljeSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNz bC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjBjBgNVHR8EXDBaMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3Ns LmNvbS9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMIGOBggrBgEFBQcBAQSBgTB/MDkGCCsGAQUFBzABhi1odHRwOi8vb2NzcC5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vc3ViL2NsYXNzMy9jbGllbnQvY2EwQgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGNmh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NlcnRzL3N1Yi5jbGFzczMuY2xpZW50LmNhLmNydDAjBgNVHRIE HDAahhhodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBADVtbXJG tKAr55xc/OUM546gXUybI72Bank0w739Mv+9BBNtq9rMEvCnLmSKhBi76c1mdXh6zXs8RQDo 6nR/aPabE3llF2T4z80smi9jfnl3y9dpu9TcgDoqDLZ7a2lBlW656XAAQzHjvLp2MC7/mxlg PYH2axa+q40mAYM20GbNsAEGbWQT1IqIh0BcLLsgbaMJHbyG/57zd9JLyMX3Vry1L1fJRQr3 GeLxMV5RtxN+mBgxrwFz/cOc09COiFExlsHgekpB5O43gqsAU16MXypyoSt4MrSfKTMHIGx6 2RF/M6vqUlvhi28gk2ZUvQ/+OX5+gjcZyooEzAAn4RuOKNswggbHMIIFr6ADAgECAgIAizAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4x KzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMT L1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBMB4XDTEw MTAxNDAxMzYzNFoXDTEyMTAxNDEyMDEwN1owgcAxIDAeBgNVBA0TFzI3NDU4MS05TlgwNHF4 TERiMG80NjlUMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8GA1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRl bnZlcjEsMCoGA1UECxMjU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBNZW1iZXIxGjAY BgNVBAMTEVBldGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJzdHBldGVyQHN0cGV0 ZXIuaW0wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQC4RG+euSlBPH3Bsl+DFs0o Ri+3QiKV5xlFQzrCtsLMhQ8Khy5iFoAlxCiojIdorJs9Dt/4MgYgCiUBrd0ec12Wxc/ayZN+ 39k2mPXQ8gbluKU0CotRjCYsloRqpjsExbzjbdTduVbjf+W4smT8+rg6xZzDsArct5WHVT8c 6CqGKfbo3eHvZfWdssSlkWuBynx6CZa1csJssEMypQrePrCMuV2eLv2a7NgRWpTQDkapJ5vx ZziQjHxUjnIvbgkrOKcbaJVE/lkMRs5kRPMFclptSxXnpdLGo8b0MrqR77JsKIv/ApXUcWp2 0UHXLbmV+8eA4/aDIQCkEoQM2OAuYrLJAgMBAAGjggL7MIIC9zAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1Ud DwQEAwIEsDAdBgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFLYRbaI0 H6DQSJsoksF2/wh4ui9UMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFHuJnJKXJKGERwLLdPwu9KzcMuXzMB0GA1Ud EQQWMBSBEnN0cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCAUIGA1UdIASCATkwggE1MIIBMQYLKwYBBAGB tTcBAgIwggEgMC4GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9wb2xpY3ku cGRmMDQGCCsGAQUFBwIBFihodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9pbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUu cGRmMIG3BggrBgEFBQcCAjCBqjAUFg1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMAMCAQEagZFMaW1pdGVkIExp YWJpbGl0eSwgc2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRD b20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8v d3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGMGA1UdHwRcMFowK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUzLWNybC5jcmwwK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRz c2wuY29tL2NydHUzLWNybC5jcmwwgY4GCCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcw AoY2aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY2VydHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy5jbGllbnQuY2Eu Y3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEANW1tcka0oCvnnFz85QznjqBdTJsjvYFqeTTDvf0y/70EE22r2swS8KcuZIqEGLvp zWZ1eHrNezxFAOjqdH9o9psTeWUXZPjPzSyaL2N+eXfL12m71NyAOioMtntraUGVbrnpcABD MeO8unYwLv+bGWA9gfZrFr6rjSYBgzbQZs2wAQZtZBPUioiHQFwsuyBtowkdvIb/nvN30kvI xfdWvLUvV8lFCvcZ4vExXlG3E36YGDGvAXP9w5zT0I6IUTGWweB6SkHk7jeCqwBTXoxfKnKh K3gytJ8pMwcgbHrZEX8zq+pSW+GLbyCTZlS9D/45fn6CNxnKigTMACfhG44o2zGCA80wggPJ AgEBMIGTMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UE CxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRD b20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAgCLMAkGBSsOAwIa BQCgggIOMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTExMDYw MzIxMzY1N1owIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFPq9b6cF2aJpQLiy6QRcqBKlGQiWMF8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJDzFSMFAwCwYJYIZIAWUDBAECMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggq hkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDCBpAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGWMIGT MIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2Vj dXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xh c3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAgCLMIGmBgsqhkiG9w0BCRAC CzGBlqCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNV BAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0 Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgIAizANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAASCAQCfNf7+RSh+hm2s/Ae1ownnenDfNxye0qwFcQg6ksxPy40t8sWood1n4T6l CBipsYQt4uBGH+k2TLzFH/jhbWeAVkuE9jTVntkfdOup4r3APXs0/sluhTumC9PIOpZY8oDs J6CL4DN16xC1a1EYJcsQqp3+q966zv94M5WJNaExq1jb4B5J60nzpJjc+/d33yjMutoGmPoK epZ3yA0jPXxxTSVH7lZUdTrXaQNlqrobArlQOk4inmUldAdURND4otlyrWFRZuQDcnoPerc4 RwMGkJ+EJBZ6XbKC1MDiHRSCqPDC285drLUGUe50BK4Pzt1M5FgCXE6xNfYCL2Ss9nilAAAA AAAA --------------ms060806020906010204030108-- From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Sun Jun 5 17:00:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F61011E8081 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 17:00:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JyRxyKHBTZq6 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9686911E8075 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so1760666pzk.31 for ; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=yWADkR7c/gc+RF87K3JDt7YRwx0Ohd51t71c1dgM/SM=; b=na2WOmbTeuXsE28Iw1YgFTjk1Ypqegu+zIAb1FhIQGX4ET2pdlICm+ggwI5uuxbTxy OgceU8EbyLSVG8+lBcgvW6T4dmClfEC7hBDeT31rOyT0jCXQXwPeL3EBjSj1meDZTd6Z rntzimEmv3kyAClYvWJAU2RG/b0ilBP3d4AcE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=WOsjR3KGfnRYO6nVIX3Jmo1HzJBEdUWUCfg+5OFZ0h4t1n6MPCMKM2HPVYcj42onoT BxNVRC7LuKigr07x7jsSdxq/kTy0TihNM9MmGmyKGpHAmIdBQqDJUwdz8rkxIApVenCt gkhMFF2llX7GgM/aUpdMqoELFJfi+gwuOUpm0= Received: by 10.142.208.20 with SMTP id f20mr616943wfg.403.1307318405190; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.34.19 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 16:59:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 01:59:45 +0200 Message-ID: To: Peter Saint-Andre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 00:00:06 -0000 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Julian posted earlier on this list that it would be > nice to have a spec, but I leave it up to the DEs > whether a link to a blog post is acceptable, i.e.: > http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html Indeed, it would be nice to have a proper specification. But it would be also nice to get a clear decision for a registration request posted in April based on the Google webmaster help article as ersatz-spec -- IMO slightly better than an expired I-D or old blog entry. Frank From julian.reschke@gmx.de Fri Jun 17 00:45:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D589E11E80DD for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:45:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.569 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4wibXEAYIv9X for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7F89D11E8136 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2011 07:45:53 -0000 Received: from p508FD183.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.209.131] by mail.gmx.net (mp068) with SMTP; 17 Jun 2011 09:45:53 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/4N6oqhIT4p5uEaWvzGE9CVcT8I2k4x8cfM0ESQw Eyjz4hJ+T9EWn6 Message-ID: <4DFB0630.2000504@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:45:52 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Ellermann References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 07:45:56 -0000 On 2011-06-06 01:59, Frank Ellermann wrote: > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> Julian posted earlier on this list that it would be >> nice to have a spec, but I leave it up to the DEs >> whether a link to a blog post is acceptable, i.e.: > >> http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html > > Indeed, it would be nice to have a proper specification. > > But it would be also nice to get a clear decision for a > registration request posted in April based on the Google > webmaster help article as ersatz-spec -- IMO slightly > better than an expired I-D or old blog entry. > > Frank Ok. It doesn't seem that we'll see a "proper" spec any time soon, so let's go ahead with registering what's there. Frank: is the template you posted in April ()... > Relation Name: canonical > Description: A "canonical" URI is the preferred version of a set of URIs > with highly similar content. It is intended to help search > engines when the same or highly similar similar content is > available at different URIs. > Reference: About rel="canonical" > http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=139394 > Notes: In and > the authors > state that Ask, Bing, Google, and Yahoo supported canonical > URIs as of February, 2009. ...what we should use? The URI seems to be less stable than http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html but appears to have more relevant content... Best regards, Julian From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Sun Jun 19 13:56:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A4D21F8481 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.732 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.732 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.367, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYwQf3eDhRSI for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C634E21F8480 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so3438427pvh.31 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=GCZ0+XtcMxQ2XXOOy/rHCEJqkC9D2FMxE1zfyY+Ax0s=; b=Zr1Nq8xB2Le1VI4dKqo8e2Ja4Fsacs/kZlPR6HiadAn5F67XuHa3tcLizk/97roGfN w9OxUDijt+U47kcHQgaC/dWXg3TCNhrLQEzcWd/24KeNsX7zpb/jmktCYim1y5cZ2z4Q Pz1Lwg/pSj7npJD4umOvVCQkG27GK9I7AlaSg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=AL5aCQYV6JkgNLMDKAQIBClJqMKOO4wA/xn2VTBU1pdmOhZBi5Nafd1jZK93QKeZDr IFhrnBwqZ4hLxJMuHVtg9jlAqtc17XowONoglIaPeV0LlU6YEQpvGAPeEy2ihba9M/Y7 f/Vj23hVm2TOu0u+5jeucMMMzYPp2XkF9tod8= Received: by 10.142.242.12 with SMTP id p12mr701881wfh.346.1308516965438; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.156.6 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DFB0630.2000504@gmx.de> References: <4DA88EA7.3060405@gmx.de> <4DE945D6.4020500@stpeter.im> <4DE953F9.2060609@stpeter.im> <4DFB0630.2000504@gmx.de> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:55:45 +0200 Message-ID: To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: link-relations Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - canonical X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 20:56:06 -0000 On 17 June 2011 09:45, Julian Reschke wrote: > Frank: is the template you posted in April [...] > ...what we should use? Amended by s/similar similar/similar/ one day later, yes. > The URI seems to be less stable than [blog entry] > but appears to have more relevant content... Well, blog entries are rarely updated, "less stable" here just means "fresher" or "more relevant". We can still hope that a "real" and "stable" specification updates the registry at some point in time (but obviously not in 2011). Unrelated, I saw that HTML5 uses rel="icon" also for what used to be rel="aple-touch-icon", does that mean we can ignore apple-touch-icon, or should this still be registered as "obsoleted by" with a pointer to HTML5 or WhatWG HTML? Similar I'm not sure what to do about "shortcut icon", is this required anywhere, e.g., in some IE versions? Or is rel="shortcut icon" always the sme as rel="icon" at least for .ICO resources (where experts claim that using the proper MIME type might no work, and prefer image/x-icon)? Cheers, Frank From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 27 01:20:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E01221F8635 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:20:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tCIa3HJlw4v1 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E8A1B21F862D for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2011 08:20:17 -0000 Received: from p508F9D9F.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.157.159] by mail.gmx.net (mp053) with SMTP; 27 Jun 2011 10:20:17 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Q4CxX1DKQSICxleVdR4p4DY0ra6ADPzIntb0Ovo 8/Da9m1sQNHWC3 Message-ID: <4E083D3F.6030200@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:20:15 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "link-relations@ietf.org" , IETF Apps Discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: [link-relations] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:20:20 -0000 (FYI) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 22:46:52 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : The Canonical Link Relation Author(s) : Maile Ohye Filename : draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt Pages : 6 Date : 2011-06-26 This specification defines the canonical link relation -- an element which designates the preferred version of content/URI from a set of duplicate or near duplicate pages. Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) Distribution of this document is unlimited. Comments should be sent to the IETF Apps-Discuss mailing list (see <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From evnikita2@gmail.com Thu Jun 30 20:26:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769761F0C4F; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l54glfAynd55; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEC61F0C4B; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fxe4 with SMTP id 4so3627917fxe.27 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C68y6oF2J46LdaDar+rb31HojWC5rEEiss9m7ZYOCfc=; b=Pkmc8A8KMaCthIuQhANJK1QX7uimRbuJi9ES9xNCoyuL40JwCsQceXG6uHS35DClgm JGoQKgIotPv/zozEq/eB8Xz7PIJZn9VQnaWu2DXypYOKgrowlJAmGpGOj+DIIA4yc4LH TjziigD8KdM9IT63+cN69S4oSOjFKjLb/yrFo= Received: by 10.223.59.92 with SMTP id k28mr4056953fah.27.1309490808651; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.191.104.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm1902916fay.21.2011.06.30.20.26.46 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E0D3EA5.7010803@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 06:27:33 +0300 From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "link-relations@ietf.org" , IETF Apps Discuss References: <4E083D3F.6030200@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4E083D3F.6030200@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: maileohye@gmail.com Subject: Re: [link-relations] [apps-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 03:26:50 -0000 Hello Maile, Several comments to your draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00. There is the Intended Status missing in it. I suppose Informational should be fine. > 1. Introduction > > The canonical link relation specifies the preferred version of a URI I think some introductory text on linking, probably based on RFC 5988, should go here. Section 2: > Presence of the canonical link relation indicates > to applications, such as search engines, that they MAY: I wonder why it's MAY; in this case implementations (explicitly, those apps which interpret Link: headers and corresponding construction in HTML) will be free to ignore it. I think normative SHOULD should be OK (sorry for pun). I support the remark from Frank Ellermann (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg02870.html) about SHOULD NOTs in the document. > The value of the target/canonical URI MAY: I suppose omitting "value of the" should be better, since there is no such term in RFC 3986. In fact, when referring the URI, we mean its value, meaning. > o Exist on a different protocol: http to https, or vice versa You probably meant URI scheme here, since https isn't a separate protocol. As before these points we had "The value of the target/canonical URI MAY" or, if you consider my comment above, "The target/canonical URI MAY", this point may be reworded as "Have different scheme names" (which suits the second variant of a preface to this list better). Reading section 3 and 5 of the draft, it seems that is mandates use of HTTP when referring to canonical URIs. And what is the situation when target URI is a 'ftp' or 'gopher' URI? Section 3 allows different scheme names in context/target URIs, if I understand it correctly. Therefore, unless it is deliberately, I think any mention of HTTP should be replaced by more generic regulations. > 8. Internationalisation Considerations > > In designating a canonical URI, please see [RFC3986] for information > on URI encoding. URIs themselves are not internationalized, in terms of RFC 3536, which defined: > internationalization > > In the IETF, "internationalization" means to add or improve the > handling of non-ASCII text in a protocol. IRIs serve for this purpose. I recommend either to rename the section to Encoding considerations or skip it at all ( I personally like 2nd variant). Thanks, Mykyta Yevstifeyev 27.06.2011 11:20, Julian Reschke wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : The Canonical Link Relation > Author(s) : Maile Ohye > Filename : draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt > Pages : 6 > Date : 2011-06-26 >