[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
[Eric van der Vlist]
[[
3.) The W3C XML Schema way
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.example.org/whatever...
Would you say it's a step backwards (or maybe two) if it leads to using
a single namespace in the instance document and rely on datatypes
compared to using a "namespace soup" and rely on element names ?
]]
I would say that for widespread, general use on the web, "it" needs to work
stand-alone. You can fail to retrieve a css stylesheet and usually get a
readable result. Hyperlinks are more fundamental, and should be able to
work stand alone for the vast majority of web pages. Being able to work
stand-alone was a powerful attraction of xml in the beginning and still, I
venture to say, is.
There are good things about linkbases and there should be some provision for
those who would really benefit by them, but that is, IMHO, secondary.
Cheers,
Tom P
|
