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

Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?

• To: Erik Wilde <net.dret@d...>
• Subject: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:23:15 -0700
• Cc: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• References: <r01050300-1015-875E9D93AFB111D683CE0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> <3D5AA0E2.9040404@t...> <3D5BDD6F.4060701@d...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020722

Erik Wilde wrote:

> 
> if there was an xlink infoset and a clear way of building a modular 
> hierarchy of different infosets, then xhtml could subset the xlink 
> infoset and cleanly
> 
> - have the link semantics defined by xlink, and
> 
> - allow only links which are serializable in xhtml syntax.

Having said that, I think that certain HTML idioms, such as

  <img src="URL of picture" alt="local text" longdesc="URL of text">

are really bad markup design and aren't worth grandfathering.  Why bad? 
Suppose you want to have descriptions (long or short) in more than one 
language, and suppose you want to provide multiple sizes of the picture, 
etc; in fact, while you can argue about the appropriate uses of elements 
and attributes almost forever, this is a good example of how not to use 
attributes.  Let's see, it was someone named Andreesen who cooked this 
one up as I recall, snicker. --Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: RE: What the .... ? Referencing XSL stylesheets across domains
• Next by Date: RE: XML Schema for large database
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread