XLink, again

Joe Gregorio

I've complained about XLink in the past. I expect to complain about XLink in the future.

, In particular about the crippling deficiency that every instance of a simple link needs to specify not only xlink:href, but xlink:type with a value of "simple". I was therefore pleasantly suprised to see a Working Group Note published by the W3C, Extending XLink 1.0, written by the inestimable Norm Walsh. That Working Group Note outlines how XLink could make xlink:type an application-level default, which would fix the above problem. Dave Megginson also holds out hope that XLink could be changed for the better.

After a brief and shining moment, where I held out a glimmer of hope, it all came crashing down and I have little confidence of this happening any time in the near future. If you read the "Note" carefully you will see that it is just a note, a document of record, something to be referenced when and if the XLink Working Group gets around to a 1.1 version. But lo, as Dave points out, the XLink Working Group is no longer active. While it is stated in the XLink Working Groups page that, "Responsibility for maintenance of documents issued by the WG rests with the XML Core Working Group in the first instance.", and Norm is a member of the XML Core WG, and the above Note was published by the XML Core WG, I just don't think it will happen any time soon. Never doubt the ability of byzantine bureaucracy and political shenanigans to trump common sense.

The whole point of the note, as outlined in the Core WG minutes
(discussion now happily in the public instead of W3C member only), was
to set the stage for a Charter revision that will allow the XML Core
WG to pursue XLink 1.1:


I hope that we can get XLink 1.1 started, and finshed, this spring.

Posted by Norman Walsh on 2005-02-07


Posted by Joe on 2005-02-07

comments powered by Disqus