W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2003

Suggested text for 3.1 (small changes)

From: Chris Lilley <chris.lilley@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:07:16 +0100
Message-ID: <724910621.20031201130716@wanadoo.fr>
To: www-tag@w3.org

Hello www-tag,

Sending via an alternate email account, chris@w3.org is temporarily

Tim Bray wrote:

TB> 3.1 first numbered step, shouldn't that be xlink:href rather than
TB> "XLink href"?  In particular since you use that in step 2 :)

No. I chose the phrase "Xlink href" to mean "the href attribute in
the XLink namespace" specifically because some people seem to think
that the entire string "xlink:href" is magical. It isn't, it can be
wibble:href and work just fine if correctly declared. Conversely,
xlink:href can not work if you assign that prefix to some other URI.

The name of the attribute is, after all, href, right?

So, its  making a point. if that point is not clear then it should be
reworded, but not omitted. I suggest clarifying as follows:

In 3.1 first bullet, replace "identified by the XLink href attribute"
with "identified by the href attribute in the XLink namespace"

In 3.1 second bullet, replace "defines the attribute xlink:href" with
"defines the attribute href".

That addresses Tim Brays consistency issue, further improves
consistency by calling the attribute href as is done in the quoted
section of the XLink spec, and addresses my 'no magic prefix' issue
and is generally a better example of the spec spelunking needed to
demonstrate in full detail how a link is traversed.

Best regards,
 Chris                          mailto:chris.lilley@wanadoo.fr
Received on Monday, 1 December 2003 11:17:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:40 UTC