[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: linking, 80/20

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: linking, 80/20
• From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>
• Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 15:33:11 -0400
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <3D613BC6.30000@d...>

Hi

It seems that a majority of arguments against the usage of xlink in the
context of xhtml turn around the notion of cognitive load, of using the
simple syntax of XML 1.0, and other unknown psychological and
philosophical considerations. At least this is what can be concluded
from the type of messages posted and related to this issue. Since using
an external document like a DTD or any other document as a CSS would
lead to the situation XML 1.0 tried to prevent (otherwise why not use
SGML), we can reasonably conclude that the basic rule differentiating
XML from SGML is that *no external document* is needed to process an XML
document. I guess that this is precisely this constrain that brought the
namespace solution. I remember that the namespace notation is present
mainly to prevent names collision. 

Would it help (this is an open question) if in the case of an absence of
name collision between two name spaces, that the prefix can be omitted.
For instance, if in one name space href is meant to indicate a link and
in other it indicates the same usage/meaning, then the prefix could be
omitted. An engine could in that case, resolve the name with or without
the prefix.

What if, in the absence of any name collision that more than one
namespace could be declared as default? Would that help resolve the
issue of cognitive load and other psychological and philosophical
considerations?

Note the direct implication would be that href could be considered as
xlink:href but could be expressed simply as href.


Cheers

• References:
  • Re: linking, 80/20
    • From: Erik Wilde <net.dret@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: linking, 80/20
• Next by Date: Re: linking, 80/20
• Previous by thread: Re: linking, 80/20
• Next by thread: Re: linking, 80/20
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread