W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: XLink 1.1: Xlink vs "legacy" linking

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:01:39 -0500
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <871wyxhdpo.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> was heard to say:
| What do you mean by "can"? Can I make a fully conforming XHTML+XLink
| user agent that does not observe any of the XLink processor require-
| ments? All I want to do is to make a XHTML+XLink user agent that fully
| complies with all XLink and XHTML requirements, I think this is not
| currently possible, so either this is made possible or the draft needs
| to point out that making such a user agent is a bad idea.

The XLink attributes are not allowed on XHTML elements: they aren't in
the XHTML schema. So an XHTML+XLink processor would have to know how
to process invalid XHTML. It's free, IMHO, to follow the XLink
semenatics or the XHTML semantics, or offer the user a choice, or
throw up its hands and claim "error".

If XLink was added to XHTML, then XHTML would have to add the XLink
attributes to elements in the XHTML namespace. If XHTML added "href"
and "xlink:href" to the same element, XHTML would have to say what to
do. (I'd say "don't do that" but that's just me.)

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2006 15:01:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:46 GMT