• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:46:54 -0400
• References: <E17s21r-0003He-00@m...>

[Uche Ogbuji]
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

> > RDDL would almost be an example of this approach. And the xlink
namespace
> > could be a default namespace, so the prefix would not have to be typed.
It
> > would also open up the possibility that these linking elements could
contain
> > optional annotation elements, which could be useful.
>
> Tut.  tut.  tut.  Attributes do not get the default namespace.  There is
no
> escaping the xlink prefix, or some prefix at least, under XMLNS 1.0.
>

Yes, I already blushed in public about that one!

Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu ages]
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XLink/XHTML consensus?
• Next by Date: Re: Microsoft's vision of data and the role of XML in thatcontext
• 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