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

RE: linking, 80/20

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: linking, 80/20
• From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@j...>
• Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 17:15:44 -0400
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <r01050300-1015-5B078B50B2AC11D6B7AA0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

> I have a very hard time seeing what value using the xlink
> namespace adds to XHTML.  John thinks the cost is minimal,
> but I think the cost is very real for people who are not XML
> folks.  Well-formedness also has a cost, but the benefits
> from that seem [divide-by-zero error, and a large number if
> I count any benefit for the namespace use] times greater
> than those of using the XLink namespace in XHTML.
> 
> That said, I think something like Erik Wilde's proposal of
> looking at XLink as an abstraction and permitting the
> mapping of components from other vocabularies into that
> abstraction works well.  

The general solution has been around for some time.  But mention it and
you get the glassy stares, whereupon the namespaces babbling returns
like an eternal broken record in the Twilight Zone.


/Jelks

• References:
  • Re: linking, 80/20
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: linking, 80/20
• Next by Date: RE: linking, 80/20
• Previous by thread: Re: linking, 80/20
• Next by thread: Re: linking, 80/20
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread