Re: [xml-dev] limits of the generic

[Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>]

On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 18:13, Tim Bray wrote:
> On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 09:05 AM, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> 
> > When you first think about it, it seems quite easy to say that
> > xhtml:img/@src has a type xlink:href and that xhtml:img has fixed
> > attributes xlink:type and friends. There must be some hidden reason why
> > this wouldn't work!
> 
> I've always assumed that you could model XLink in XML Schema.  Good 
> lord, given the massive scope of XLink, if it can't model a little 
> language with a total of less than a dozen elements and attributes all 
> told, something's really wrong.
> 
> Doesn't mean that I think it should be compulsory.

You should have a look to Relax NG :-)

> Anyhow, if you did this, you could default away almost all the XLink 
> machinery but you'd still have xlink:href= on your linking elements, 
> which I gather the HTML WG finds unacceptable. -Tim

Yes, unless (assuming you buy in the concept of PSVI) if the XLink WG 
had accepted that it was sufficient for an attribute to have a 
datatype "xlink:href" to be considered as a hyperlink reference instead
of having a "name" (to take the WXS vocabulary) "xlink:href".

When you think about it, this is what the PSVI is about, what the XQuery
WG is reclaiming (and what originals like Simon or myself are denying).

Assuming that you accept to use WXS and its PSVI, this would provide
exactly the same type of binding than HLink is proposing in a
lightweight fashion.

Eric (playing the devil's advocate)
-- 
Rendez-vous à Paris.
                          http://www.technoforum.fr/integ2002/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------