OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] xlink 1.1

> I guess that means we'll eventually be seeing updates of a wide variety
> of specs that see relatively little use.  That's not all bad.  In the
> case of XLink, though, it really highlighted for me that even a spec
> that utterly failed to build a community is still sort of somehow
> marching along.

?? I don't know that XLink was ever intended to build a community in that
sense: xlink is utility conventions. You don't talk of an XML Namespaces
community either: both are something that people use or don't use to get
some other job done. MathML, that is a community. RDF, HTML, SVG. You
wouldn't have expected an XLink conference, for example.

I don't know, for example, that it is even possible to have a complete
XLink library (e.g. in Java), except perhaps a set of interfaces or
abstract classes. Not specific enough semantics.

But I do agree that XLink could have been bigger. We ended up with a
linking system with no semantics and usable syntax in XLink and a linking
system with strong semantics and unusable syntax in (initial) RDF. RDFa
still is not officially defined over XML (neither officially nor workable
in practice), so there I think there is still good potential for people to
use XLink+GRDDL.

Rick Jelliffe

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS