[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 15:09, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> > Who knows if something really basic such as reserved xml:id and xml:href
> > attributes wouldn't have been a big (and messy) success?
>
> XLink is too flexible (and as a consequence too verbose) to be
> successful in a culture that emerged from a/@href. Wouldn't something
> along the lines of xlink:href + xlink:src + xlink:ref (and perhaps a
> xlink:multi to flag multi links) be sufficient for the needs of most,
> far simpler to use than the current XLink (for simple links), and more
> likely of success? It does nothing to address all the complex linking
> needs, but those would be easier to build later once at least the simple
> parts of the spec are successful :)
Yes, that's what I meant: either a very simple set of xlink attributes
if you consider that as a separate feature or even xml attributes if you
want to give a strong signal that it should be a core feature of XML
itself (like xml:base).
Eric
--
Weblog:
http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog?t=category&a=English
Upcoming XML schema languages tutorial:
- Amsterdam -half day- (18/04/2004) http://masl.to/?P220516D7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
