[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ben Trafford <ben@legendary.org> wrote:
| At 11:49 AM 9/27/2002 +0100, Norman Gray wrote:
| XLink was intended to have an attribute remapping aspect, we just
| couldn't figure out how to do it. [...] From my perspective, the XLink
| WG would have gotten slapped down had they suggested an approach like
| Steven Pemberton's.
| People seem to have the opinion that XLink was never meant to include
| attribute remapping, or that the group just ignored it. Neither is the
| case. Attribute remapping was one of the original goals; and we did a
| lot of work on it. We just couldn't figure out a way to do it that
| would go over cleanly.
Go over cleanly, as in with the folks who would have slapped down any
sugeestion of an approach like Steven Pemberton's?
It sounds like you're saying that XLink wound up with no (re)mapping
mechanism because there was no way found to appease prejudice. Have I
understood this correctly?
|
