On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 01:38:36PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote: > | My point was that for the instance to link to its linkbase, it must > | have an element holding xlink:type='extended', so please don't forbit > | that possibility :-) > > That's not my reading of the XLink spec. An element with > xlink:type='extended' *is an extended link*, it doesn't point to > one. What you want, I believe, is something like this: > > <link role="linkbase" > xlink:type="simple" > xlink:href="myLinkBase.xml" > xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/linkbase"; > xlink:title="My Link Base" > xlink:show="none" > xlink:actuate="onLoad"/> > > No?
Hum, right: "The instruction takes the form of an arc specification (whether an explicit one in an extended link, or an implicit one in a simple link)" I didn't remember we changed this so that simple links could be considered as arc suitable for this. Excellent ! Should xlink:type="extended" be forbidden still ? I'm tempted to not block them on a general basis. If there is elements with a predefined linking semantic, then fixing them at the DTD level makes sense. On the other hand blocking the use of advanced linking facilities because you don't know a priori how and why they should be used sounds too strong. If such construct actually appear that may be something to learn from rather than forbid, no ? And the arcrole should take care of the possible different semantic that may get applied to links in a given context. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
