Re: XPDL (was Re: XML is broken)

Hi.

I agree with you here. I'm swinging to the point of view that the XML
document should in an ideal world the XML document should know zero about
anything outside of itself, being purely a data-set.

And the issue of manifests, while very appealing, I feel might be best
solved from XLink/XPointer. If this where rich enough then an
XLink/XPointer resource could constitute a manifest. I'm not sure what the
advantages of another proposal in this area might offer except to confuse
an already confusing area.

I confess to a heavy personal bias here, and am merely expressing
preference, not making assertions of "the one true path", but would we be
better addressing the shortcommings of XLink, and see if the W3C can't be
given a kick.

People have explained to me why the W3C need to take such an unholy amount
of time over these standards comprising of a handful of tags, but I seem to
have forgotten. Is there a mailing list that XLink falls within the remit
of? (xml-dev?) At the moment it seems to suffer from a stunning lack of
imagination.

Cheers
     Guy.





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 04/07/99 05:11:47 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  Re: XPDL (was Re: XML is broken)





[SNIP]

My fundamental problem here is that I view this as a sort of
layered approach, and I don't want the lower layers (XML) to have any
knowledge of the upper layers (XLL, XSL, XPDL, etc.)





 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list