Subject: Re: Xlink From: Duane Nickull <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 12:05:45 -0700 |
> A more benign view of the deep freeze is that the current (admittedly > aging, in Webtime) WD comes pretty close to the mark, and that the Working > Group has been waiting for experimental implementations (like yours, and > Hybrick) to point up the ways in which the spec is unworkable -- or > workable but too difficult. (This would be aside from any holes in the spec > that don't require *doing* XLink to be obvious, of course.) Where does one display their pleasure/displeasure of how xlink handles their "experimental implementations" so the working group can address some very real problems we have uncovered?? > That said, I think I'm even more eager for XLink/XPointer to solidify than > for XSL. Once you've tasted XLink's Chunky Monkey, it's hard to reconcile > yourself to HTML's vanilla. I agree - the spec I have seen makes sense. Now if someone would just sign off on it so we can all move ahead *sigh*. Duane Nickull > ========================================================== > John E. Simpson | The secret of eternal youth > simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx | is arrested development. > http://www.flixml.org | -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Xlink, John E. Simpson | Thread | Re: Xlink, John E. Simpson |
RE: Xlink [Amaya demo], Sall, Ken | Date | RE: XSL as a better XPointer was RE, Didier PH Martin |
Month |