Ben Trafford wrote:
>
> At 11:51 AM 9/25/2006, James Fuller wrote:
>
>> dont know if RDDL has some part to play here?
>
>
> The essential problem I have with RDDL is the requirement that
> roles be stated as URIs. I mean, that's fine if you're only trying to
> use it to define namespaces (its intended purpose), but not so good for
> things like CML, for example.
agreed,
the reason why I mentioned it was that I toyed around with building a
simplistic facade over XLINK, using RDDL a few years ago...though I am
afraid there is too much DPH(desperate perl hacker)-ness to the approach.
I am afraid that I would drown in 'flame' proposing it here....for
starters.....I added an xml:href attribute (yes adding attributes to xml
reserved namespace is a very silly thing to do) which was easy and
simple to use.
gl, Jim Fuller
