Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Common approach to XLink namespace #1

Open
kerstarno opened this issue Feb 12, 2019 · 6 comments
Open

Common approach to XLink namespace #1

kerstarno opened this issue Feb 12, 2019 · 6 comments
Labels
EAC-CPFAttributes These are attributes specifically used in EAC-CPF only at the moment EAD3Attributes These are attributes specifically used in EAD3 only at the moment SuggestionToMerge For suggestions to merge existing elements/attributes

Comments

@kerstarno
Copy link
Contributor

kerstarno commented Feb 12, 2019

While EAC-CPF uses attributes from the XLink namespace (xlink:actuate, xlink:arcrole, xlink:href, xlink:role, xlink:show, xlink:title, xlink:type), EAD3 has taken the decision to move away from XLink and to use its own version of these attributes (actuate, arcrole, href, linkrole, linktitle, show).

@kerstarno kerstarno added EAC-CPFAttributes These are attributes specifically used in EAC-CPF only at the moment EAD3Attributes These are attributes specifically used in EAD3 only at the moment SuggestionToMerge For suggestions to merge existing elements/attributes labels Feb 12, 2019
@kerstarno
Copy link
Contributor Author

kerstarno commented Feb 12, 2019

Conversations so far have reiterated the argumentation followed during the EAD revision, that inclusion of namespaces introduce "onerous and needless complexity [...] when processing XML" (quote from Preface to EAD3 Tag Library).

In addition, the use of XLink in general seems to be declining.

Furthermore, the point has been made that, if EAC-CPF and EAD3 were to use XLink, this should mean an actual implementation of these attributes as set out in XLink rather than e.g. implying restrictions (as done currently with xlink:type only allowing the value "simple").

@kerstarno
Copy link
Contributor Author

kerstarno commented Feb 19, 2019

Inclination to NOT include XLink namespace anymore.

Next steps:

  • Reconsider if equivalents of all XLink attributes are necessary in the context of EAD and EAC-CPF
  • Reconsider alternative names of the attributes that are considered to be necessary, similar to e.g. linkrole and linktitle in EAD3

@kerstarno
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've linked this issue to the according conversation within the EAC-CPF subteam.

@SJagodzinski
Copy link

See EAC-CPF team decision in our issue.

Removing is agreed, but make sure to keep linking functionality in the schemas with the same language.
Advantages of xlink namespace were seen for interoperability by using a common namespace, esp. interoperability with RDF.

Also agreed on your next steps.

@kerstarno
Copy link
Contributor Author

Requirement to pick up on decision at EAC-CPF team.

Similarly to what's been said for the XML namespace (#2), terminology might be useful to discuss jointly with EAD and EAC-CPF teams for alignment.

@SJagodzinski
Copy link

EAD-EAC-CPF meeting, 28 January 2020:
Decision to delete @xLink:type without substitution.

EAC-CPF Berlin meeting, 11 March 2020:

Decision to remove @actuate, @Arcrole, @show from xlink attribute set in EAC-CPF and in EAD.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
EAC-CPFAttributes These are attributes specifically used in EAC-CPF only at the moment EAD3Attributes These are attributes specifically used in EAD3 only at the moment SuggestionToMerge For suggestions to merge existing elements/attributes
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants