• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• From: Chris Croome <chris@w...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:40:22 +0100
• In-reply-to: <GD1ZJE08C418252MKUQVHEZU53HBNK.3d57d70c@MChamp>
• Mail-followup-to: xml-dev@l...
• References: <E17eGxn-0007rf-00@m...> <GD1ZJE08C418252MKUQVHEZU53HBNK.3d57d70c@MChamp>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

Hi

On Mon 12-Aug-2002 at 11:41:00 -0400, Mike Champion wrote:
> 
> Hmm, HTML is far and away the most successful markup language in
> history.  There's something to be said for learning from it, not
> expecting it to adopt a technology that still baffles its inventors,
> explainers, implementers, etc. I can't think of any substantive reason
> why HTML users would want anything to do with having links be in a
> different namespace.

If that is the case then perhaps Xlink should use the XHTML namespace for
links, something like this:

  <my:linkexample
    xhtml:href="http://chris.croome.net/"
    >
    Chris Croome's home page  
  </my:linkexample>

Just a thought...

Chris

-- 
Chris Croome                               <chris@w...>
web design                             http://www.webarchitects.co.uk/ 
web content management                               http://mkdoc.com/   
everything else                               http://chris.croome.net/  

• References:
  • Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• Next by Date: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Previous by thread: Editor's Concrete Syntax (ECS)
• Next by thread: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread