On Jun 6, 2005, at 5:44 PM, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
> I don't recall, but in any case the result was that both schemas ended
> up with the w3 namespace, not so that the namespaces would be the same
> for both schemas, but to comply with the standard. (And now, MODS
> -- I can't speak for METS -- is wondering why we bother complying with
> that standard......)
Well, the reason to comply with the standard is sort of self-evident:
to comply with the standard.
I'd say if you don't like the standard there's no reason why you can't
invent your own linking attributes. I just don't think they should in
any way reference (by standard prefix or namespace) xlink in that case.