- From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 12:00:55 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
/ Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com> was heard to say:
|>
|>That is a different issue (I think). It's one thing to say that the
|>_semantics_ of XLink are unacceptable for XHTML but another that "I just
|>don't like the way it looks" -
|
| It's not about looks, it's about usability from the document authoring
| perspective.
There have been several days of technical discussion about the various
ways in which XLink may or may not satisfy the linking requirements of
XHTML.
I'm not sure I fully understand the usability requirement. Is it your
position that in principle
<a href="someURI">text</a>
is usable, but
<a x:href="someURI">text</a>
is not.
Is that true principally because users are used to the unqualified
attribute name? For a brand new vocabulary, would <foo x:href="someURI"/>
be usable?
Be seeing you,
norm
- --
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | The important thing is not what the author,
XML Standards Architect | or any artist, had in mind to begin with but
Sun Microsystems, Inc. | at what point he decided to stop.--D. W.
| Harding
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQE9mxg3OyltUcwYWjsRAvedAJ9DEONTR8Pl8z9vfUr+9nBuEGVzAwCgmV5I
BBAPZZIQgSlxc4ZwOXjbJUA=
=goi6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:01:45 UTC