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

Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?

• To: Joe English <jenglish@f...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 14:40:30 -0400
• References: <87ofc5tivg.fsf@n...> <f3.1f45acab.2a84eada@a...> <87sn1ifz8d.fsf@n...> <200208142124.g7ELOG319789@d...>

Joe English wrote:
> 
>....
> 
> Come to think of it, if the Infoset augmentation is expressed
> as a set of attributes with a distinguished namespace name,
> instead of as a new set of [information item]s, then
> the current XLink draft could work unchanged.  You just
> need to explicitly state that the xlink:* attributes need
> not be present in the source document, and may instead
> be added by some (unspecified) preprocessing transformation.

That sounds great from a language lawyer point of view but if I'm making
a commercial software application, like XMetaL or Google, *how do I
recognize links* in a vocabulary-neutral manner?

-- 
"When I walk on the floor for the final execution, I'll wear a denim 
suit. I'll walk in there like Willie Nelson, John Wayne, Will Smith 
-- Men in Black -- James Brown. Maybe do a Michael Jackson moonwalk."
Congressman James Traficant.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
  • XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...
  • Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Schema for large database
• Next by Date: RE: XML Schema for large database
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread