• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 16:41:58 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• References: <r01050300-1015-51AA1A58B09811D683CE0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020722

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

>   I could certainly live with:
> 
> <img>
>   <src xlink:href="whatever.gif" />
>   <longdesc xlink:href="item.txt" />
>   <alt>This is alt text</alt>
> </img>

It gets more interesting when you add

   ...
   <src type="thumbnail" xlink:href="whateverTN.gif" />
   <longdesc xml:lang="JA-jp" xlink:href="expl-nihongo.html" />


> I'm not sure I feel confident, however, that it's the one and only
> correct answer.  

No more am I.  But it feels quite a bit cleaner than what we have now. -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...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XLink 2.0 Requirements
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread