W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > July to September 2002

DISCONTINUE [xml-dev] Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?

From: eximcon <eximcon@mail.ru>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 07:39:26 +0530
Message-ID: <00a001c24013$b70f8880$ba9b09ca@abcd4>
To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>, "Masayasu Ishikawa" <mimasa@w3.org>
Cc: <AndrewWatt2000@aol.com>, <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, <shane@aptest.com>, <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-html@w3.org>, <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>


----- Original Message -----
From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
To: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
Cc: <AndrewWatt2000@aol.com>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>; <shane@aptest.com>;
<tbray@textuality.com>; <www-html@w3.org>; <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?



Masayasu Ishikawa scripsit:

> No.  We are waiting XPointer to advance to more mature stage, and
> relevant media type registrations get updated.

Adopting XLink and XPointer involves providing a conformance clause
for the use of XPointer: which of the four XPointer documents do you
make mandatory.  It's possible to shuffle this off onto XMLMIME,
but then you limit XHTML to whatever is appropriate for general XML.
IMHO XHTML 2.0 should define its own level of XPointer conformance.

--
John Cowan   jcowan@reutershealth.com   http://www.reutershealth.com
    "Mr. Lane, if you ever wish anything that I can do all you will have to
do
        will be to send me a telegram asking and it will be done."
    "Mr. Hearst, if you ever get a telegram from me asking
        you to do anything you can put the telegram down as a forgery."
Received on Saturday, 10 August 2002 01:41:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:44 GMT