W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: ed: organization: conformance and terminology

From: Eve L. Maler <elm@east.sun.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 14:12:42 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, spec-prod@w3.org
Thanks for the comments.  I think you're right about reorganizing the 
handling of definitions.  It will take a bit of work to do, especially 
where glossary term definitions get moved into the flow of the text.  But I 
think the result will be good.

One response below:

At 12:12 PM 3/9/00 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
>Similarly for [Defintion: ] link and linking element (what's the
>difference between those, by the way?) vs. "An XML
>element is XLink-conforming if ...".

The difference is that a link is the thing created/asserted by a linking 
element.  And notice that XLink defines elements that aren't "linking 
elements"; there's only two of those (simple-type and extended-type).

Eve Maler            Sun Microsystems
elm @ east.sun.com    +1 781 442 3190
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2000 14:11:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:15 UTC