Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 09:28 AM 9/17/2002 -0400, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: >That's all. xlink:type and the namespace declaration would be defaulted in >from the DTD. The DTD would be built into web browsers which would >recognize the public identifier for XHTML 2.0. The other link attributes >would be either defaulted or ignored. XLink does allow applications to >define their own semantics and behavior for links, and to ignore or change >the behavior suggested by attributes like xlink:show. XHTML 2.0 is an XML application, and is not going to be based upon an assumed arcane knowledge of it's semantics, or a requirement for hard-wired DTDs. Let's stop that assumption quickly. >The only objection I've seen so far to XLink that is not based on >fundamental misunderstandings of XLink While it's debatable whether there's a "fundamental misunderstanding" of XLink (which is just as likely to be "what we intended isn't what got produced in the spec" problem, if *we*, as a community of people who are supposed to be smart enough to handle this -- can't handle it -- then XLink is hopeless for the rest of the world. IOW -- "you just don't get it" isn't a solution if any kind. Ann
|
