Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Right. I think that's what I was saying. RDDL is a language in the system, not the system. Use of RDDL makes life easier but can't be required. XLinks are a little lower in the food chain; above namespaces but below RDDL. One could conceivably use a different application of XLinks and do the same thing. Why, well who knows, but the levels are important to understand. We can't legislate what a namespace URI resolves to because a namespace URI doesn't have to resolve. An XLink does, yes/no? Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...] It is namespaces that are the core part of XML. RDDL provides people and software a reasonable way to find out about and use namespace related information. It turns out that an XHTML document is a great way for people to find out about a namespace, and XLink allows software to discover similar information.
|
