Lists Home |
Date Index |
I'm not in the HTML WG, though I am in the XForms WG, and we try to confer
with each other once in a while. Everything here is personal opinion only.
Quick clarification: From my reading the 'href' attribute in XHTML2 is not
in the xhtml2 namespace, rather it is unqualified (as in XHTML 1.x, and all
earlier SGML flavors)
<xhtml:a href="http://example.com/">A hyperlink</xhtml:a>
On the W3C's silence on XLink: I really don't know. I don't think there is a
single "position" on XLink, or HLink, or anything else. The W3C is a bunch
of participating parties that sometimes agree and sometimes not.
But there are specific technical problems with XLink, severe enough to
preclude it from being used in XHTML:
* There's no concept of a link that is part of a form (either GET or POST)
* There's no concept of multiple links on the same element.
Example, an <img> ..whoops--make that <object>.. might:
1. cause an image link to be traversed on load
2. cause a longdesc link to be traversed on user request
3. cause a href link to be traversed on a different kind of user request
* Complex links can't nest properly
* All links intrusive into the XML syntax.
Where would XML Schema be if xsi:type was the only way to assign
datatypes? Out-of-line markup is a necessity in many applications.
>is this an appropriate approach having two "standards" providing
essentially similar functionality?
There's a place for both DTDs and XML Schema, for bitmap and vector
graphics, CSS and XSL, so I don't see any reason why a similar dichotomy
couldn't exist for describing links. It doesn't have to be a competition, it
could be a partnership instead.
--- context information snipped, other than a few useful links --
Henry Thomson's response to my question about the future of XLink
Background materials at:
And response at: