- From: Eve L. Maler <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:55:21 -0400
- To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>
- Cc: "Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>, "XML DSig" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>, <www-xpath-comments@w3.org>, <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>, <Daniel.Veillard@w3.org>, <connolly@w3.org>
I apologize for not being entirely caught up on this thread yet. I do want to make one "side comment": At 04:33 PM 6/8/00 -0700, John Boyer wrote: >Yes, absolutely no problem with XBase. The connection to XBase comes from >the fact that XLink is considered to be dependent on XBase. Since XLink is >also based on XPointer, which in turn is based on XPath, one naturally >concludes that XBase may impact XPath. XLink is not based on XPointer; it has no dependency on it. XLink and XPointer can be used entirely separately, as when you have a "third-party" (out-of-line) XLink extended link that associates two GIFs, or when you have an HTML document containing an <A HREF="..."> link into the structure of an XML document. Eve -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center elm @ east.sun.com
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2000 16:55:04 UTC