• From: Evan Lenz <evan@e...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:55:54 -0800

Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> At this point, personally, I'd drop coverage of XLink and XPointer.  A 
> paragraph seems reasonable.
>
> XInclude does get use in back-end processing, so I'd leave it in, most 
> likely - at least as a sidebar in the entity processing section.  It 
> doesn't require a huge amount of space to explain in any case.
>
I'd have to concur, unless the book is about XBRL, which is unique in 
making very heavy (if misguided) use of XLink.

XInclude is such a simple specification that it's handy to have the 
standard around when you need such a mechanism. Also, it's trivial to 
implement in XSLT 2.0.[1]

Evan Lenz
http://lenzconsulting.com

[1] http://lenzconsulting.com/namespaces-in-xslt/#inherit-namespaces

• References:
  • Failed XML standards
    • From: Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@g...>
  • Re: Failed XML standards
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>