RE: href vs. xlink:href

The WG considered using xlink:href initially, but rejected the idea.  It
was felt that XInclude processing and XLink processing occur at
different layers, and in general we would expect all the include
elements to be replaced by the referenced content before an XLink
processor sees it.  The cost of another namespace declaration is thus
pretty high compared with the benefits.  Some also felt that making
lower levels of the architecture (XInclude) dependent on higher levels
of the architecture (XLink) was unwise.

 

However, XInclude's extensibility model would allow you to annotate the
element with attributes from the xlink namespace, if such information
was useful to your application.

 

- Jonathan

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Vun Kannon, David [mailto:dvunkannon@kpmg.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 12:25 PM
To: 'www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org'
Subject: href vs. xlink:href

 

I think that the XInclude draft would be improved if it built upon the
XLink simple link and href syntax. The cost is an additional namespace,
the benefit is improved support by all XLink aware processors for all
documents.

 

Regards,

David vun Kannon

Senior Manager, KPMG LLP