RE: XHTML & hyperlinking opinions (long, sorry)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:53 PM
> To: Champion, Mike
> Cc: WWW-Tag
> Subject: Re: XHTML & hyperlinking opinions (long, sorry)

Thanks.  I guess you're saying that XLink "should" (no RFC 2119
connotations!!!) be taken seriously because it actually does
what it claims to do and was designed to do.  I see now; I was a bit puzzled
only because so many people seem to violently disagree.  


> I think disagreement should be accompanied by examples: 
> "here's a better way ...

In a situation where a particular solution is widely deployed and solving
real problems daily, I would totally agree that the burden of proof is on
those who disagree with it.  But in the current discussion, it's HTML that's
widely deployed and solving real problems, so it's not so obvious to me that
it's XLink that should be given the benefit of the doubt.  The only
rationales I could come up with for doing so were purely organizational
("it's a Recommendation!") or aesthetic ("there are too many technologies
for linking").  I guess "that's the way I would do it!" is a much better
one!

>
> I also have bitter personal experience in maintaining HTML linkage 
> networks in the presence of updates and think that if I had an 
> out-of-band linkbase capability it would make those problems 
> way easier.

Yes! I'm sure many of us do.

> I think Microsoft, like every technology vendor, is busy and short of 
> staff.  Right at the moment there's not much market advantage for 
> microsoft to pour heavy amounts of investment and creativity into 
> enhancing the web browser, a product which brings no revenue 
> and wins no  market share.

Hmm.  See above -- there's a big, ugly, practical problem that nearly every
serious HTML user has, and for which the W3C Recommends a solution.  I would
think that the folks in Redmond (who, uhh, could hire an AWFUL lot of
developers with that $30 odd billion they have burning a hole in their
wallet) if they thought that XLink solved the problem, simply for fear of
LOSING market share if someone else implemented it and solved people's link
management problems.  The MS folks are, to greatly understate the point, no
dummies, and not horribly resource constrained, so I suspect there is a
deeper answer than "busy and short of staff."

Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 17:48:48 UTC