On 16 April 2012 15:41, Rushforth, Peter
<> wrote:
>> However, I think
>> the first reaction was to point you towards XLink and XPointer.
>
> Yes, others have pointed that out. I'm thinking about RESTful use of
> XML. REST is the basis on which the Web's protocol is designed.
> "typed" links are a fundamental part of REST, I think.
>
> So, my question is, what is the simplest change that could be made
> to XML which would enable its "success" on the web? My suggestion
> is to insert linking lower down in the XML technology stack than
> what is done by XLink.
I'd encourage you (if you haven't already) to dip into the 1000s of
messages and posts that have been written about XHTML 'vs' non-XML
HTML (HTML5, WHATWG, etc.).
Most of the fire in those exchanges wasn't about linking notations,
but rather around XML's alleged brittleness vs HTML's support for more
lax, tag-soup parsing when the content is partly broken. A preference
amongst Web developers for JSON rather than XML, and Javascript rather
than XQuery/XSLT, is also part of the mix.
http://blog.jclark.com/2010/11/xml-vs-web_24.html and
http://norman.walsh.name/2010/11/17/deprecatingXML give some flavour
of that discussion. Or http://annevankesteren.nl/2007/10/xml5
cheers,
Dan
