Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] > Sent: 17 January 2002 14:50 > To: xml-dev@l... > Cc: jborden@m... > Subject: RDDL possibilities > [...] > There was some discussion at XML 2001 about ways to improve RDDL, and > they seemed to come from two related directions: > > 1) Creating clusters of resources rather than a flat list Don't we have something like this already, e.g. resources with the same nature or purpose. Or was the thinking to allow arbitrary collections? > 2) Describing sequences for resource processing to define pipelines ... > Number 2 in particular could take RDDL much deeper into > computer interactions than has typically been the case so far. My feeling is that defining pipelines is something for another syntax -- i.e. lets make this modular. I think I'd prefer to be able to define a pipeline in a syntax dedicated to that job, and then just have RDDL link to it. Similarly to an XSLT stylesheet, the end point of the pipeline might be defined by the arcrole. Seeing as there's a number of pipeline related projects going on at the moment, I think it's worth letting these play out a little to see how things end up. At this point I think RDDL has some very definite benefits, and this could get clouded if it becomes put other uses. I don't see how defining pipelines is really related to defining a directory of resources, beyond the fact that those resources may play a role in the pipeline processing. Cheers, L.
|
