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

RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]

• To: 'Ann Navarro' <ann@w...>, 'Arjun Ray' <aray@n...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 16:34:37 -0500

That is a consensus of the uninformed, Ann. 
That is how we get into these traps where 
mutual self-referencing creates an illusion 
of spec-based design.  The question here is 
simple:  are these arc forms renamed and 
slightly weakened such that what we end 
up with is more complicated and less powerful?

len


From: Ann Navarro [mailto:ann@w...]

At 04:19 PM 9/13/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>I read this earlier and almost responded; it appears
>the WG is attemping a weak version of architectural
>forms.
>
>Is this another case of changing the names and adopting
>a piece of another technology (namespaces) that makes
>the result more complicated than the original and
>ends up being less powerful?

No, see XHTML Modularization conformance definitions, 
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/conformance.html#s_conform . 
These terms have been around for several years now (without argument from 
the community).

The point of the message is the linking examples, not an ideological 
argument about application construction.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• Prev by Date: RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Next by Date: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Previous by thread: RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration languages]
• Next by thread: RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread