- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 12:28:01 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org, Paul Prescod <pprescod@blastradius.com>
On Thursday, November 28, 2002, 1:31:05 AM, Paul wrote: PP> The Web has profited greatly by the existence of tools that can follow PP> links from resource to resource without necessarily understanding all of PP> the semantics of the relationship. Google is the most obvious example PP> but it is not the only spider out there. There are also tools that allow PP> link checking, site replication, link visualization, and so forth. PP> In W3C specifications there are a variety of ways to link. HTML alone PP> uses several different attribute names. SOAP uses a bare-name convention PP> (even on elements in other namespaces). XLink is supposed to be used PP> across XML vocabularies but only vocabularies that are "document-like". PP> RDF uses another convention. XSLT and XML Schema link to inclusions PP> using yet another convention. PP> Does anybody else see this as a problem? Is it a TAG issue? An xml-core PP> issue? xml:href anybody? Is XLink supposed to be the solution? If not, PP> why not? Hi Paul, Yes its a problem. Part of the issue is that some folks do not reliably distinuish between an attribute of type anyURI, which there can be lots of per element, and a link (which can have only one such attribute that forms the link URI, if there is to be any metadata also associated with that link using standard and readily recognisable attribute names). -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 29 November 2002 06:28:01 UTC