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

Re: XLink olden days

• To: simonstl@s... (Simon St.Laurent)
• Subject: Re: XLink olden days
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 21:46:55 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <r01050300-1015-ECD1BBA9AC8611D69D4E0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> from "Simon St.Laurent" at Aug 10, 2002 01:30:55 PM

Simon St.Laurent scripsit:

> I think the notion is that XLink was originally a toolkit for describing
> linking semantics, which used an architectural forms [based|like]

An architectural form *exactly*.  That's where the attribute-renaming
and link-type (which is really element-renaming) stuff comes from.

> In later drafts, post-namespaces, XLink became just a vocabulary.  To
> use XLink, you must use attributes in the XLink namespace.  

It occurs to me that the shift from SGML-style renaming to namespaces
is essentially like the shift from uucp email addressing to domainist
(@-based) email addressing.  We've gone from an environment where mail
is routed based on the best discoverable path from here to there,
to a system in which every mail destination has an absolute name
which says nothing about delivery.

Almost everybody, except perhaps Peter Honeyman, agrees that this is an
improvement.

-- 
John Cowan  jcowan@r...  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
"In computer science, we stand on each other's feet."
        --Brian K. Reid

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XLink olden days
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: XLink olden days
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: how to se the transformed output...
• Next by Date: Re: XLink olden days
• Previous by thread: Re: XLink olden days
• Next by thread: Re: XLink olden days
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread