[8929] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: A question/suggestion for HTML 2.0 or 3.0
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Mealling)
Thu Aug 17 14:09:43 1995
From: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling)
To: jamesc@harlequin.co.uk (James Casey)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 14:08:19 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu, www-talk@www10.w3.org
In-Reply-To: <v0213050cac5928838c71@[192.88.238.59]> from "James Casey" at Aug 17, 95 05:14:17 pm
Resent-From: www-talk@w3.org
James Casey said this:
> At 15:59 17/8/95, Michael Mealling wrote:
> >I'm sitting here hacking Mosaic code so that it can understand URCs and
> >it occurs to me that a very powerful addition to the Anchor tag would
> >be a META attribute that specifies meta-information that is not within
> >the document itself.
>
> But this has the problem that the author of a document has no control over
> the meta information associated with the document.
Having no control is a desirable thing in many places:
Peer review of documents
third party review for appropriate material for minors
cataloging by librarians
electronic corpora
> Having meta information
> specified in the HEAD as an associated LINK'ed resource would seem to be
> the correct way to do this.
Ok, from my reading of the 2.0 and 3.0 specs I see no way to do the
function I want. I want to be able to get the meta-information for
a given resource BEFORE I actually get that resource. If you put the
LINK in the HEAD then you have to get that resources head before you
can find out anything about it.
> This is not the proper place to put meta-information about a document, but
> perhaps to put meta-information about the link itself ( whatever that
> might mean ??? )
So where would you put information about whats on the other side of
the link before you get it?
-MM
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life is a game. Someone wins and someone loses. Get used to it.
<BR>
<HR><A HREF="http://www.gatech.edu/michael.html">Michael Mealling</A>
