Just for the record:
wrote:
> Background materials at:
> >
> >
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Jun/0116.html
> > And response at:
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Jul/0158.html
>
> I read Steven Pemberton's email which you cite to indicate that there is a
> substantive problem here with XLink. On that generality we seem to agree.
>
> However, it did seem to me that at least one point he raises may be a red
> herring. He comments that "it was too clumsy to use a different namespace"
It was Tim Berners-Lee who put it that way:
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/XLink
and the HTML WG felt it's utterly misrepresenting the whole argument,
that's why he sent a response. It's not fair to attribute that
sentence to Steven.
Regards,
--
Masayasu Ishikawa /
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium
