• To: "David G. Durand" <david@d...>
• Subject: Re: XPointer crisis
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 01 Feb 2002 13:14:17 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <p05100303b8807575e600@[192.168.155.106]>
• References: <p05100303b8807575e600@[192.168.155.106]>

On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 11:59, David G. Durand wrote:
> If you want Xpointer killed, you can of course relax, because it 
> seems to be dying quickly.

No, don't relax.  (Unless it's RELAX NG.)

XPointer is a huge beast - a good candidate for a 2.0 spec, but enormous
for a 1.0 spec.  I'd be much much happier to see something smaller for a
first round.  

I even hope that a simpler XPointer might return some life to the
listless XLink.
 
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: "David G. Durand" <david@d...>

• References:
  • XPointer crisis
    • From: "David G. Durand" <david@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Next by Date: RE: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Previous by thread: XPointer crisis
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer crisis
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread