[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 09:28 AM 9/17/2002 -0400, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
>That's all. xlink:type and the namespace declaration would be defaulted in
>from the DTD. The DTD would be built into web browsers which would
>recognize the public identifier for XHTML 2.0. The other link attributes
>would be either defaulted or ignored. XLink does allow applications to
>define their own semantics and behavior for links, and to ignore or change
>the behavior suggested by attributes like xlink:show.
XHTML 2.0 is an XML application, and is not going to be based upon an
assumed arcane knowledge of it's semantics, or a requirement for hard-wired
DTDs. Let's stop that assumption quickly.
>The only objection I've seen so far to XLink that is not based on
>fundamental misunderstandings of XLink
While it's debatable whether there's a "fundamental misunderstanding" of
XLink (which is just as likely to be "what we intended isn't what got
produced in the spec" problem, if *we*, as a community of people who are
supposed to be smart enough to handle this -- can't handle it -- then XLink
is hopeless for the rest of the world.
IOW -- "you just don't get it" isn't a solution if any kind.
Ann
|
