- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:45:50 -0400
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
At 12:53 PM -0400 9/26/02, Simon St.Laurent wrote: >I'm afraid it's not very different. Extended links require multiple >elements to express <img src="bogus.jpg" longdesc="bogus.txt" />. They >may be child elements, but there's more than just a few extra tags >involved. But you don't have to use extended XLinks if you don't want to. Multiple simple XLinks solve HTML's needs just fine. >> So has XHTML. As long as XHTML 2.0 intends to be backwards >> incompatible with classic HTML in ways completely unrelated to >> linking, this argument just doesn't hold water. > >If you really want to throw classic HTML completely out the window, I >suppose it doesn't matter. The XHTML WG keeps talking about evolution, >not reinvention, however. But they are evolving a new species that can't interbred with the old one. Mutations can be helpful, but as mutating past the point of recognition, there's not much if any benefit to sticking with older solutions when better ones are available. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 14:57:35 UTC