• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>,"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 16:26:28 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3D5C0D91.4080509@t...>
• References: <r01050300-1015-5DECD634B07511D683CE0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>

At 01:22 PM 8/15/2002 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:

>Without going very deep, the current way IMG is done just feels like bad 
>markup design for a bunch of fairly obvious reasons.

If it hasn't been noted, it should be -- that IMG is no more in XHTML 2.0. 
The issue it represents, however, still needs to be dealt with.

Ann

• References:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• 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