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

Concrete Hyperlinking Suggestion (was: Suggested alternate wordin g re XLink)

From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:24:15 -0700
Message-ID: <E840F0B7E6189547BDB91DA8BF2228AB28C795@csmail.cardiff.com>
To: "'www-tag@w3.org'" <www-tag@w3.org>

Mike Champion wrote:

So, I'm curious:  Given that the objective is to have ONE
XML linking spec rather than XLink + HLink, and given that there
are  many objections (some perhaps based on extra-technical 
factors, I don't know), and given that the AC vote on XLink
suggested that the issues be revisited by a newly chartered WG,
is that a possible way forward?  Accept that for good reasons or
bad, XLink 1.0 is not a suitable basis for XHTML 2.0, but perhaps
XLink 2.0 could be?  Accept that HLink is not acceptable in its
current form, but perhaps some refactoring of XLink and HLink
into XLink 2.0 could give us the best of both worlds?


A large +1 on this suggestion.

In fact, let me make it even more concrete.

The Linking folks are understandably quite busy until their charter expires
(at the end of the year?), finishing up the four XPointer drafts.

The HTML folks seem ready and willing to do some work, and don't want to be
put on hold until next year.

In light of the situation, I suggest:

1) The TAG ask the HTML Working Group to immediately begin working on a
requirements document for XLink next-version. This document should reflect
broad requirements, not just the specific things needed by one particular
Working Group.

2) Early next year, a rechartered Linking WG, or the HTML WG, or some
combination thereof, get assigned the task of producing XLink next-version
specification to fulfill the requirements.

This course will be immediately productive, as well as go a long way towards
defusing the combat-laden perceptions seen on the mailing lists and other
places.

Thanks,

.micah
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 16:24:22 GMT

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