I assumed it was canon in the same sense the Four Swords games were...on account of it basically being Four Swords without pimp Link. So it makes sense that it fits into that crazy timeline.

Gameplay-wise, I treat it the same way in terms of being a mainline game. Unique, and maybe fun, but I wouldn't recommend someone play Four Swords as the first Zelda experience. So not really mainline in the same sense as the more focused single-player experiences. Though that's just personal opinion I guess.

I can't see it... =/

I still can't see it, but it works indirectly :/

http://nintendoeverything.com/wp-content/uploads/zelda-tri-force-heroes-interview-q-656x656.jpg

Zelda's official timeline is already pretty convoluted and stretched to be believable..

Damn i dont know why you guys cant see it. But its oficial from nintendo. I will update the thread with the link.

So Nintendo implied and then outright said that Link wasn't in this game but now he is in as the playable character? I'm disappointed, Nintendo.

What?? 

There have been several reports implying that Link is not in TFH and then it seemed like Nintendo outright said none of the playable characters were Link, just people who look like him. But now he's the playable character again. 

Show me those articles.

lol...people seriously need to give up with this "Zelda Timeline" stuff. Nintendo never should have fed the fanboys by playing along with the idea that there even is one, or SHOULD be one.

To me, I've always just accepted the far more rational notion that with the exception of a few entries that have direct sequels, most of the Zelda games are just another different take/retelling of "The Legend of Zelda" itself.

The idea of a "Zelda Timeline" wherein ALL the games take place in the same reality and world, even though that world is substantially different in almost each and every iteration, is about as nonsensical as the Metal Gear Solid plotline.