- From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 12:53:44 -0700
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > >... > > xml:lang identifies the language of the content of the element. But it > involves using that "syntactically intrusive" xml: so lets define our > own attribute called lang or la or language or langue or Sprache. But I can work up many interesting examples of situations I want to know the language of an element without knowing the rest of its semantics. I can also think of many examples where I want to know that an element is a link without knowing the rest of its semantics. But I CANNOT think of a circumstance where I want to know that an element is a *presentational* link without knowing the rest of the semantics. Unless the W3C makes an institutional commitment to use XLink even in *non-presentational* vocabularies like XML Schema, XSLT, etc., I cannot reliably use it as a link-detection marker. Presentational vocabularies are the *least interesting* customers of XLink because they are almost always augmented by a stylesheet which describes the presentational features (including link actuation rules). If it is only used for half of the vocabularies I care about, then it is essentially useless. So if the W3C is serious about XLink as the only syntax for linking, then I will encourage my customers to use it. Otherwise I won't. -- Come discuss XML and REST web services at: Open Source Conference: July 22-26, 2002, conferences.oreillynet.com Extreme Markup: Aug 4-9, 2002, www.extrememarkup.com/extreme/
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2002 15:54:20 UTC