[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Xlink Isn't Dead
At 05:16 AM 9/22/2006, Michael Kay wrote: >Actually, I don't think it belongs only in the styling languages. I think >the big mistake in XLink is a failure to recognize that there are two >separate things: a relationship between pieces of information, and a >navigable hyperlink. We've achieved the separation of content from >presentation in other areas, we just haven't achieved it for relationships. >The presentation forms do need better navigation facilities, and core XML >also needs (much) better facilities for modelling relationships. Okay, color me confused. What you're talking about sounds like the classic markup difference between what something is and what it does. That usually falls into the realm of style vs. content. XML can model just about anything, in my experience. How is it lacking? Are you talking about specific tags or attributes to model relationships? Wouldn't that be falling into the exact same problem XLink has? If a styling language were able to say "this is a link" and "that attribute is the link address" and other such goodness, what else would be needed in core XML? --->Ben
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|