|
|
Re: [xml-dev] XLink 2.0 Requirements
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
In a message dated 13/08/2002 01:47:23 GMT Daylight Time, MDubinko@cardiff.com writes:
But the point I wanted to drive home is the 'actuate' values. The important
piece that XLink could add is something to distinguish between the two ways
to actuate the two different links. Same issue--the spec hard codes a single
value "onRequest", and later cases come up where a 2nd value is needed.
Micah,
The spec doesn't hard code a "single" value, since there is onRequest, onLoad and the mysterious "other".
I am not sure precisely what "other" is intended to cover. If "other" is used with relevant values for arcrole, isn't there a lot of scope for flexibility in what is already there in XLink 1.0?
It would be really useful if the (X)HTML WG could publish a brief Note on the linking use cases they want to cover. If this ground has already been covered in discussions between the (X)HTML WG and the XLink WG it would be useful to have the use case document published. That would allow everybody to understand what the (X)HTML WG want to achieve and allow informed comment to be made about whether XLink already does what is needed/desired or to suggest improvements in XLink 2.0.
Andrew Watt
|
|
|
|
|
|