Re: XLink PR comments

At 03:31 PM 12/29/00 +0700, James Clark wrote:
>5.1.2 says "If a locator-type element has anything other than an
>extended-type element for a parent, the locator-type element has no
>XLink-specified meaning." 5.1.3 makes a similar statement for arc-type
>elements. I expected 5.1.1 to contain a similar statement for
>resource-type elements, but I couldn't find it.
>5.1 says "Subelements of the locator, arc, or resource type that are not
>direct children of an extended-type element have no XLink-specified
>relationship to the parent link."  The following subsections make a
>rather stronger statement, namely "that they have no defined meaning".
>I would suggest 5.1 say the same.

These are reasonable suggestions.  I think I just overlooked making them 
all consistent.

>I couldn't understand why the sample DTD in Appendix B makes the label
>attribute required for the locator-type element but not required for the
>resource-type element.

Another oversight.  I think they should both be #REQUIRED, since an element 
without a label attribute is uninteresting to XLink.


Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @

Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2001 13:28:20 UTC