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

RE: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?

• To: "'AndrewWatt2000@a...'" <AndrewWatt2000@a...>
• Subject: RE: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@c...>
• Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:44:12 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Hi Andrew,

<disclaimer>
I'm not in the HTML WG, though I am in the XForms WG, and we try to confer
with each other once in a while. Everything here is personal opinion only.
</disclaimer>

Quick clarification: From my reading the 'href' attribute in XHTML2 is not
in the xhtml2 namespace, rather it is unqualified (as in XHTML 1.x, and all
earlier SGML flavors)

<xhtml:a href="http://example.com/">A hyperlink</xhtml:a>

On the W3C's silence on XLink: I really don't know. I don't think there is a
single "position" on XLink, or HLink, or anything else. The W3C is a bunch
of participating parties that sometimes agree and sometimes not.

But there are specific technical problems with XLink, severe enough to
preclude it from being used in XHTML:

* There's no concept of a link that is part of a form (either GET or POST)

* There's no concept of multiple links on the same element.
Example, an <img> ..whoops--make that <object>.. might:
  1. cause an image link to be traversed on load
  2. cause a longdesc link to be traversed on user request
  3. cause a href link to be traversed on a different kind of user request

* Complex links can't nest properly

* All links intrusive into the XML syntax.
  Where would XML Schema be if xsi:type was the only way to assign
datatypes? Out-of-line markup is a necessity in many applications.

>is this an appropriate approach having two "standards" providing
essentially similar functionality?

There's a place for both DTDs and XML Schema, for bitmap and vector
graphics, CSS and XSL, so I don't see any reason why a similar dichotomy
couldn't exist for describing links. It doesn't have to be a competition, it
could be a partnership instead.

Thanks,

.micah


--- context information snipped, other than a few useful links --

Henry Thomson's response to my question about the future of XLink
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2002JanMar/003
4.html).

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

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: actually
• Next by Date: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Previous by thread: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Next by thread: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread