Re: xlink, not multilink or xml-link

• From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
• Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 09:42:59 -0800
• To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970224094102.009b7100@pop.intergate.bc.ca>

At 11:07 AM 2/24/97 -0500, Sam Hunting wrote:
>> >Why not just "xlink"? 
> As Jon points out, it needs to begin with "XML-"

Irrelevant; xlink still works.  It's going to have to be XML-something;
the spec currently uses XML-MLINK, and in the prose we say multilink.
So it could be XML-XLINK and "extended link".  I still like it. -T.

Received on Monday, 24 February 1997 12:49:22 UTC