[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: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@j...>
• Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 17:10:47 -0400
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20020813043239.040a1ec0@m...>

Christopher R. Maden wrote:

> 2) was really killed by politics, as best I can remember;
> architectural forms were completely unviable in the W3C
> environment, and once namespaces came along, it was pretty
> much a requirement to use them.  Without attribute
> remapping, the options were 1) to trample on users' naming
> freedom and reserve href across the board (which is still an
> incomplete solution for HTML), or 3) to use namespace-
> reserved attributes.  I continue to think that, given the
> political restrictions, the XLink WG made the right
> decision.  2) would have been stronger, but AFs just didn't
> make the political grade.

That's what it smelled like from down in the trenches.  It's good to
finally hear someone in the know actually confirm it.


/Jelks

• References:
  • Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
    • From: "Christopher R. Maden" <crism@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XLink olden days
• 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