• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 21:54:01 +0000
• In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20020913175111.00c2b950@m...>
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B94B@HQ5> <4.3.2.7.2.20020913175111.00c2b950@m...>

Ann Navarro <ann@w...> wrote:
| At 04:34 PM 9/13/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

|> That is a consensus of the uninformed, Ann. [...] The question here is
|> simple:  are these arc forms renamed and slightly weakened such that 
|> what we end up with is more complicated and less powerful?

| Single word answer (direct from the chair): No.

Is the chair sufficiently acquainted, with either ArchForms or the
proposals on the now defunct w3c-xml-sig list, to make such a categorical
statement?  Or is it simply a priori belief?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• References:
  • RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Next by Date: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Previous by thread: RE: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Next by thread: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread