W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2002

Re: two failings of XLink

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:53:15 -0400
To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050300-1015-73580F90D17011D68A750003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>

Elliotte Rusty Harold claims: 
> >The second issue is the only-one-URI-per-element rule.  While I can
> >understand to some extent the arguments in favor of that from an
> >abstract point of view, in practice it seems bizarrely limited if not
> >simply broken.
> 
> There is no one-URI per element rule in XLink. there is a one-URI per 
> tag rule. That'sa very different thing.

I'm afraid it's not very different.  Extended links require multiple
elements to express <img src="bogus.jpg" longdesc="bogus.txt" />.  They
may be child elements, but there's more than just a few extra tags
involved.

> So has XHTML. As long as XHTML 2.0 intends to be backwards 
> incompatible with classic HTML in ways completely unrelated to 
> linking, this argument just doesn't hold water.

If you really want to throw classic HTML completely out the window, I
suppose it doesn't matter.  The XHTML WG keeps talking about evolution,
not reinvention, however.

-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 12:53:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:11 GMT