[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration languages]
Uche Ogbugi wrote: >The HTML WG is contradicting itself. >You seem to be claiming that you have no mandate to develop an AF-like >solution. I'm not seeing any contradictions. The HTML WG mandate, to quote from the charter [1] is exactly: "Develop solutions for linking in the XHTML Family." On the other hand, the Linking charter [2] expires at the end of 2002, and states "the working group does not expect to ask for another extension: further work in this area beyond the requested duration will likely require either a newly chartered working group or transfer of responsibilities to other working groups" So it seems that for the time being, we're stuck with two different approaches. Either a newly chartered group or the "transfer responsibilities to other working groups" part seems promising, but I still feel like I haven't heard both sides of the story. [In particular, after the linking folks reaching consensus on requirement B.2 [3], I'm curious about what kind of difficulties led to the seeming lack of consensus on meeting that requirement. If sharp rocks are hidden in those waters, we're all better off knowing about them.] Thanks, .micah [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/05/html/charter [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/12/xmlbp/xml-linking-wg-charter.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xlink-req/#syntax -----Original Message----- From: Uche Ogbuji [mailto:uche.ogbuji@f...] Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 7:55 PM To: Ann Navarro Cc: Arjun Ray; xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration languages] > At 09:35 PM 9/13/2002 +0000, Arjun Ray wrote: > >Ann Navarro <ann@w...> wrote: > > > >| The point of the message is the linking examples, not an ideological > >| argument about application construction. > > > >The lesson from the message is that namespaces and colonification are > > > > *** *B* *R* *O* *K* *E* *N* *** > > > >The pope and his nuncio, of course, aren't listening. And so WGs are > >caught in the toils of a disaster not of their own making. > > > Exactly. > > We're rowing with the oars that we have. Until decisions are made to fix > other things, we have no choice but to keep toiling. See TAG and Namespaces > 1.1 Last Call to fix that situation. The HTML WG is contradicting itself. You seem to be claiming that you have no mandate to develop an AF-like solution. If so, how is it that you have a mandate to create something with as much wheel-reinvention as HLink? As I see it, if you are authorized to develop HLink, then you are authorized to develop it rightly. -- Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com Apache 2.0 API - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-apache/ Basic XML and RDF techniques for knowledge management, Part 7 - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think12.html Keeping pace with James Clark - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/libra ry/x-jclark.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
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
|