Sorry, resending this, as I don't think my gmail account is signed up to the list. (if it posted anyway, apologies for the doubler)
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Foskett, Mike > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Could someone tell me if the following use of rel and rev are semantically >> accurate? > > Not quite sure I follow from your code, but to voice it out: > >> <a href="#tandc" rev="appendix">T&Cs</a> > > Roughly, this says: "the current page is the appendix of the place I'm > linking to" > >> <a href="tandc.html" rel="appendix">T&Cs</a> > > "The place I'm linking to is the appendix of the current page" > > If I half understand your reasoning, you'd want this the other way > around: the link somewhere in your page TO the T&C uses rel, and then > the link in the T&Cs that links back to the page per se (and > presumably closes the popup?) would use the rev...but the link text > itself should read something like "back to the page", rather than > T&Cs. > > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > __________________________________________________________ > re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively > [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > http://redux.deviantart.com > __________________________________________________________ > Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force > http://webstandards.org/ > __________________________________________________________ > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
