[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?
At 10:37 PM 8/11/2002 -0700, Tim Bray wrote: >Clearly there's no benefit for HTML to adopt XLinks for untyped >one-directional anchored links, HTML is already very good at that. But >if HTML wanted to add links with multiple ends, or which could be out of >line, or could have some simple behaviors, why invent your own rather >than adopt XLink? The question is serious, not rhetorical. -Tim Tim, while I appreciate the honesty of the question, it frustrates me that given your position within XLink, that it has to be asked. We could spend several hours this morning digging through the communications between our groups -- but should that really be necessary? Steven even flew to France to a Face to Face meeting to explain our issues and concerns, and why we simply couldn't adopt your end product -- was he talking to the walls there? Frustrated, Ann
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|