Roger Hågensen <resca...@emsai.net> writes: > A link element in the header, maybe call it <link rel="share" > href="http://example.com/article/12345/"; /> > or <link rel="share" /> if the current url (or the canonical url link if > present) should be used, although I guess in a way rel="share" will > probably replace the need to use rel="canonical" in the long run.
I do not understand. Why should one invent a rel value (“share”) that conveys the same semantics as an already existing one (“canonical”) ? -- Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann <http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
