• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XLink and XForms
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 05:16:36 +0000
• In-reply-to: <3D6F9C0D.1060309@d...>
• References: <110.1783f762.2aa0d544@a...> <3D6F9C0D.1060309@d...>

Erik Wilde <net.dret@d...> wrote:

| i do see the danger of enccouraging people to use non-xlink 1.0 
| syntaxes with this strategy, and please don't bring up the 'how do 
| i recognize xlink syntax' debate again. 

On what basis could one conclude that some syntax is *non*-xlink?

  "You're using non-xlink syntax!"
  "Er... how so?"
  "Don't argue with me!  You're using non-xlink syntax, I tell you!"

Okay.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XLink and XForms
    • From: Erik Wilde <net.dret@d...>

• References:
  • XLink and XForms
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...
  • Re: XLink and XForms
    • From: Erik Wilde <net.dret@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Why is there no schema for RSS?
• Next by Date: Re: XLink and XForms
• Previous by thread: Re: XLink and XForms
• Next by thread: Re: XLink and XForms
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread