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

Re: Links are links

From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:51:50 -0700
Message-ID: <3D98FFB6.8050301@prescod.net>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, www-tag@w3.org

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
>...
 > Either way, HLink is not a viable solution because it is specific
 > to XHTML (by definition, even if not by technology).

I think that the working group defined it to be HTML specific to avoid 
the political battle of saying that they needed to define a new language 
that has 100% overlap with XLink.

> If XLink in its current form is unsuitable for XHTML 2.0, then I believe
> it is unsuitable for any language and should not be a Recommendation.

That is my personal conclusion. XLink was made a REC out of exhaustion 
and has not found an enthiastic user base.

> It is therefore necessary for those people ill-effected by XLink's
> status to either come up with XLink 2.0 (not another format-specific
> meta-markup language) or use the W3C process to change the status
> of XLink to better reflect its real status within the W3C.

I don't think it is necessary to get all tied up in process until we've 
worked out what are the technical issues. It isn't just longdesc.

  Paul Prescod
Received on Monday, 30 September 2002 21:52:24 GMT

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