> At 04:52 PM 9/27/2002 +0000, Arjun Ray wrote:
>
> >It sounds like you're saying that XLink wound up with no (re)mapping
> >mechanism because there was no way found to appease prejudice. Have
I
> >understood this correctly?
>
> Pretty much -- solutions that would have met our requirements were
> dismissed as 'un-elegant'.
Just for clarity, does that mean that (for those making the decisions)
name-disambiguation approaches were considered "elegant" while
name-equivalence approaches were considered otherwise?
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
