I (used to) like rev="canonical"

Update 4/14: So, I liked rev="canonical", but I like the notion of pages offering sets of alternative URLs better. There are enough cracks in the case for rev="canonical" to stop caring about it and instead focus on the notion behind it. However it's expressed—is it rel="shortlink" now?—the final remaining things I'd like to see are: An more generalized scope for alternate URL choices asserted by publishers, not just URL shortening. Other criteria beyond character length include ease of entry on mobile devices (eg. short, but also simple, maybe mostly numeric), ease of verbal mention (eg. billboards, postcards, etc). HTTP headers are great where available—hooray for HEAD—but it still needs to be in the page for publishers who can't set custom headers. Microformats are great, but I'd rather not parse a whole page to the footer to lift out the desired URLs. Don't panic. Have fun. And with that, I'm going to try coming up with other things to write about so this blog doesn't stay dormant. The rest of this entry remains unedited below... [ ... 2353 words ... ]