Should navigation methods be specified in the documentation spec?

Question

Should navigation methods be specified in the documentation spec?

baskaufs opened this issue 8 years ago · comments

The previous specification said that items in the table of contents should be hyperlinks to the text. I'm not sure that this matters as long as there is some navigation system. I don't think that DwC or AC follow this strictly, but use the navigation system that works well with the content management system that they use. See section 3.2.3.2 of the documentation spec

John Wieczorek · Answer 1 · Mon Apr 25 2016 20:34:06 GMT+0800 (China Standard Time)

I agree that the previous specification is too constraining.

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Steve Baskauf notifications@github.com
wrote:

The previous specification said that items in the table of contents should
be hyperlinks to the text. I'm not sure that this matters as long as there
is some navigation system. I don't think that DwC or AC follow this
strictly, but use the navigation system that works well with the content
management system that they use.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#30

Bob Morris · Answer 2 · Mon Apr 25 2016 22:05:29 GMT+0800 (China Standard Time)

How connected is this to decisions about hash vs slash as in #33 ? E.g., does one choice of hash vs slash make navigation easier of harder. It wouldn't seem to ...

Steve Baskauf · Answer 3 · Mon May 02 2016 10:53:04 GMT+0800 (China Standard Time)

I suppose in the olden days, one would use a hash to allow a browser to jump to an anchor. However, there must be ways to make this happen through URL re-writing on the server or something like that. Just try http://purl.org/dc/terms/replaces in your browser.

Jonathan A Rees · Answer 4 · Wed May 04 2016 22:27:02 GMT+0800 (China Standard Time)

That DC hack is quite old, it's just an HTTP redirect where the Location: header value contains a hash. It used to be this was a violation of the HTTP spec, and different browsers did different things with it, so it was considered Not a Good Idea. However, the issue was taken up by the HTTPbis WG, and in the recently revised HTTP spec, it's allowed. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-7.1.2 It's highly likely the browsers have caught up. So you should consider it an option, if you like it.

Steve Baskauf · Answer 5 · Tue May 10 2016 20:09:28 GMT+0800 (China Standard Time)

References to hyperlinking were removed from Section 3.2.3.2.