• To: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>,"'Elliotte Rusty Harold'" <elharo@m...>,"'Bob DuCharme'" <bobdc@s...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:17:12 -0400
• In-reply-to: <000b01c24546$9ef32f80$6401a8c0@didierhome>
• References: <p04330101b982cad47be1@[192.168.254.4]>

At 01:01 PM 8/16/2002 -0400, Didier PH Martin wrote:
>  I have to admit that I am a bit
>confuse about the WG goal and intentions, or maybe it is because the WG
>itself is confused :-) I would be very much interested to know and
>understand the motivations behind the xlink specs rejection.

Our comments have been linked within this discussion multiple times.

As Shane pointed out earlier (as well), we hope to have a document in the 
public space Real Soon Now that will perhaps better demonstrate our needs. 
However, it's not fair to assert that they're unspecified at this point -- 
it's been hashed over and over and over again.

Ann

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@l...>
  • RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: WXS acronym?
• Next by Date: RE: XML, hypertext
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Next by thread: RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread