After taking a look at the note, I have a concern.
The note proposes
<?xml:stylesheet href="mystyle.css" type="text/css">
as the equivalent for the HTML
<LINK href="mystyle.css" rel="stylesheet" type="type/css">
(There are, of course, many more examples...)
The same information, for the most part, is contained in both statements, and
a processing instruction ducks the issues raised by using an element to
implement the link. Still, I'm wondering if XML isn't already becoming loaded
down with different ways to reference external material.
External entities provide one mechanism for including material. The DOCTYPE
declaration provides another mechanism. This processing instruction is yet
another mechanism. XLink provides another set of mechanisms which at least
'transclude' information if not 'include' it.
I realize that these things are are connecting material of different types in
different contexts, but it seems too many mechanisms are providing similar
functionality in different contexts.
I'm definitely _not_ saying that this way of implementing stylesheets is a bad
idea - it's probably the most convenient way to do it in many circumstances.
I'm hoping strongly that we don't find any other needs that require another
reference of a different type.
Simon St.Laurent
Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies