Simon St.Laurent scripsit:

>  I think the notion is that XLink was originally a toolkit for describing
>  linking semantics, which used an architectural forms [based|like]

An architectural form *exactly*.  That's where the attribute-renaming
and link-type (which is really element-renaming) stuff comes from.

>  In later drafts, post-namespaces, XLink became just a vocabulary.  To
>  use XLink, you must use attributes in the XLink namespace.  

It occurs to me that the shift from SGML-style renaming to namespaces
is essentially like the shift from uucp email addressing to domainist
(@-based) email addressing.  We've gone from an environment where mail
is routed based on the best discoverable path from here to there,
to a system in which every mail destination has an absolute name
which says nothing about delivery.

Almost everybody, except perhaps Peter Honeyman, agrees that this is an
improvement.

-- 
John Cowan  jcowan@[...].com  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
"In computer science, we stand on each other's feet."
        --Brian K. Reid

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>