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

Re: RDDL(2): new version up

• To: XML Developer List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: RDDL(2): new version up
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:52:49 -0500
• In-reply-to: <1074641841.4002.188.camel@l...>

henrik.martensson@b... (Henrik Martensson) writes:
>I have a bit of trouble understanding why XLink hasn't cought on. As
>W3C recommendations go, it is one of the more useful. XLinks are no
>more difficult to implement than the other linking solutions that
>litter W3C recommendations, and XLinks have the benefit of offering
>standardized and link processing and the promise of reusable link
>processing software.

I have a few answers to that one:

* no Microsoft support
* limited browser support generally
* too many years in the making
* most people still don't get/want multi-ended links
* XPointer was slow to arrive, over-complex when it arrived
* standardization in linking isn't that exciting anyway
* overlaps with RDF and Topic Maps for more abstract possibilities

That's a brief list.  Given more time, I can certainly find more.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDDL(2): new version up
    • From: Henrik Martensson <henrik.martensson@b...>
  • Re: RDDL(2): new version up
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: RDDL(2): new version up
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <lists@j...>

• References:
  • Re: RDDL(2): new version up
    • From: Henrik Martensson <henrik.martensson@b...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RDDL(2): new version up
• Next by Date: Re: RDDL(2): new version up
• Previous by thread: Re: RDDL(2): new version up
• Next by thread: Re: RDDL(2): new version up
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread