Lists Home |
Date Index |
Michael Kay wrote:
> You are making exactly the same mistake. The reason that XLink has not
> taken off is that it neglects the basic raison d'etre of XML, which is
> to separate information representation from user interface concerns. XML
> needs a way to model relationships (it currently has several, none of
> which is very good). "Links that should be presented to the user" belong
> in a user interface vocabulary, not in XML itself.
This is a plausible argument, but I don't buy it - I think that
hyperlinks are one of the defining characteristics of the Web and at the
end of the day are content not presentation. The #1 reason XLink has
not taken off is that Microsoft has not seen fit to implement it in IE.