[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions

• From: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@e...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:50:45 -0500

Sorry to contribute only now that the thread has gone a bit stale, but...

Please be very careful.  XLink's show="embed" semantic has nothing to do 
with actual inclusion (where inclusion means something like "macro 
substitution" or "entity resolution").  Embedding has to do with merging 
the *rendering* of a link's ending resource into the starting resource, 
much as HTML's IMG element blends a "remote" graphic with a "local" 
document for display.

I would say that the show attribute is one of the things that makes XLink 
uniquely about hyperlinking, as opposed to a generic association mechanism 
such as RDF or topic maps, so I believe it makes eminent sense for that 
attribute to be in the XLink namespace.

         Eve

At 09:40 AM 11/9/00 +0100, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
>David Orchard wrote:
> > The two problems that I mentioned still exist.  All of the attributes on
> > XLinks are specifically meant for hypertext.  XInclude is very much not a
> > hypertext problem, it's a tree join in memory problem.  Therefore most of
> > the attributes that XLink has created aren't appropriate for XInclude.
>
>Yes, you're right, XLink is heavily biased toward hypertext presentation
>and it would have been cleaner if the "show" attribute had be from
>another namespace.

--
Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ east.sun.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions
    • From: David LeBlanc <whisper@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML TO PDF
• Next by Date: [Zvon Announcement] Complete CSS2 reference with examples
• Previous by thread: CFP XML and Distributed Applications
• Next by thread: RE: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread