Re: Dictionary link types

• From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
• Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 09:27:08 -0400
• To: dd@w3.org
• Cc: WAI HC Working Group <w3c-wai-hc@w3.org>
• Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970923092708.00734e8c@pop.uunet.ca>

At 04:25 AM 23-09-97 -0400, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
>
>> Example:
>> <link href="dictionary.xml" rel="dictionary (abbreviation, phonetic)">
> 
>Anyone wants to argue whether or not a syntax like:
>
><link href="dictionary.xml" rel="dictionary" class="abbreviation, phonetic">
>
>is better or worse ?
>

I would argue that both syntaxes are worse.
LINK was never intended to do RDF, so we
should probably not try to force-fit RDF
into LINK.

In other words, it seems that the problems
that the proposed solutions are addressing
are best solved through a mechanism for
asserting and locating resources. That is
what RDF is intended to do.

Received on Tuesday, 23 September 1997 09:27:53 UTC