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

Re: two failings of XLink

From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
Date: 27 Sep 2002 18:29:22 +0200
To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Cc: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1033144163.27425.544.camel@ibook>

On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 17:45, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

> >If not, could you give an example where you think that extended links
> >*would* be a good fit for a markup language's requirements, and
> >describe how your example is different from the example with the
> ><object> element in XHTML?
> I think out of line links and linkbases really require extended 
> links. I don't think you could handle that with multiple simple 
> links.So for example I could have many different slide documents, and 
> use different linkbases to pick and choose different combinations of 
> those to assemble into one slide show. However, the HTML links are 
> very much inline.

Isn't it what Topic Maps are about? and isn't XTM using only simple

I think that "require" is a bit strong and would rather say that
extended links are a convenience given to people who want to implement
out of line links and link bases... Now they use it or not depending on
their needs and perception of the recommendation :-)


Rendez-vous  Paris.
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 12:29:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:34 UTC