3308Re: xlink question
- Feb 3, 2004yes, I found a restriction aginst it in 5.3 of the namespace spec.
Thanks for your input.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
> This doesn't just go against the design principles of namespaces, itresolve
> isn't even namespace valid. The problem is that both attributes
> to the href attribute in the http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink namespace.It is
> namespace-invalid to have to attributes with the same universalname on
> the same element.points to
> I'm not an XLink whiz, but I think that the following is correct.
> <person xlink:xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
> <name>Ronald Bourret</name>
> <mother xlink:type="simple"
> xlink:href="#p1" />
> <father xlink:type="simple"
> xlink:href="#p2" />
> One real advantage of this over the syntax proposed below is that it
> doesn't resort to any sort of trickery -- it's very clear that the
> mother element points to mom's element and the father element
> dad's element. I think this could be generalized by having a<relative>
> element with an xlink:arcrole element defining what kind of relativethat
> you're pointing to.
> Your message does point out one shortcoming of XLink, though, and
> is that you can only have one link per element since you arerestricted
> to using the href attribute. Some people definitely would havepreferred
> to let people define their own linking attributes, but that didn'tshown
> happen, so you need to put the links on different elements as is
> -- Ron
> johncoe42 wrote:
> > I was in the GenealogyXML yahoo groups and posted a suggestion
> > XLink. Is this a valid XLink usage?, I'm trying to make twoinstances
> > of xlink, one for 'mother' & one for 'father'.make
> > I know there are other ways of doing the same thing, I want to
> > it more human readable.this
> > Am I 'against the design principles', as Michael Kay suggests in
> > attached exchange??This
> > Any feed-back greatly appriciated.
> > --- In GenealogyXML@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Kay"
> > <michael.h.kay@n...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You have a point that it is not descriptive, how about
> > > > something like: xmlns:mother="http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink"
> > > > xmlns:father="http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink"
> > > > <person mother:href="#p1" father:href="#p2"/>
> > >
> > > One of the principles behind namespaces is that prefixes are
> > arbitrary
> > > and carry no meaning; it's only the namespace URI that matters.
> > > example, while legal, goes entirely against the designprinciples.
> > >
> > > Michael Kay
- << Previous post in topic