[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
/ "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com> was heard to say:
| Norm Walsh writes:
|> In any event, I think it's quite a leap from "the TAG thinks HTML
|> should use XLink" to "the whole world must use XLink (or some other
|> technology)"
|
| I'm sorry, but I don't see the distinction,
Really. Uhm.
"Group A thinks Group B should use technology C".
vs.
"Group A thinks everybody should use technology C".
The former is compatible with other Groups using (or not using)
technology C as appropriate. The latter isn't. What the TAG said was
firmly in the former class.
| except that XHTML operates
| under W3C auspices and is therefore more easily ordered about.
I can sometimes order my dog about, that's as far as my command extends.
| The W3C
| continuously and unapologetically keeps turning out "XML-whatever"
| specifications, promoting this notion of the W3C as keeper of a coherent
| "XML family" of specs, and getting rather snippy whenever their
| technical judgment or political wisdom is challenged.
Is this relevant?
| (Given how lousy a fit XLink is to what the XHTML WG seems to be trying
| to accomplish, the generic-trumps-specific message seems remarkably
| plain.)
I don't think it's a lousy fit. And yes, I think generic trumps
specific sometimes. In particular, I think the fact that SVG, MathML
(maybe), XBRL, and others are using XLink, and Mozilla is starting to
support it, means there's value in using it in XHTML.
| It's time to get over the notion that a committee of experts can solve
| semantic problems for a wide range of problems. It was very nice of the
| W3C to provide a home for the simplification of SGML and give us a
| useful syntax, but the results since then have been hideous - and in
| large part because the world takes the W3C's pretensions seriously.
<shrug/>
Be seeing you,
norm
- --
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | One's never alone with a rubber duck.
XML Standards Architect |
Sun Microsystems, Inc. |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQE9mI9aOyltUcwYWjsRAthMAJ4rVEQTAjsD+/RZ3ZsgF7eKzbLFhwCePqFb
cWvJOLB4RBQICZ7hoYWZDN8=
=gfZE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
