[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: XHTML m12n XSD
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Ann Navarro <email@example.com>, Rick Jelliffe <firstname.lastname@example.org>,email@example.com
- Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 16:25:45 -0600
Yikes. Sorry to hear about the mishap. Being about
90 miles south of Nashville, if it is ice related,
I understand. We've had a cold cold winter. I hope
that goes well.
I don't quite understand the rest of it. Maybe some
of these issues can be exposed and help obtained from
XML-Dev by discussing them in the context of Rick's
draft paper. There are certainly some experienced
eyeballs out here and discussing the draft let's those
who must respect W3C confidentiality rules do both.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Ann Navarro [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
At 03:14 PM 1/4/01 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Wouldn't an XLink module be a good thing to have?
Now there's another hairball. A newly published document (that I haven't
had time to read, unfortunately we had a family mishap over the New Year's
holiday, and I've been in Nashville dealing with it until this morning) --
XHTML has had constraints from WAI regarding multiple attributes of type
URI, which XLink hasn't allowed -- this is now supposed to be allowed, or
there's some assertion that XHTML doesn't have to do linking that way, but
the jury would certainly be out for a long session on that idea.