Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Micah Dubinko wrote: > For general-purpose XML linking, I don't think anyone has a comfort level > for what works and what doesn't, otherwise, this discussion wouldn't be > necessary. :-) We have some areas where we have some knowledge on what works or what is needed. - The universal (more or less literal) including of another document. With a properly modularized core the issues on how this interacts with validation, adding default values and so on should be solvable. We have this already as xinclude, xsl:include, xsd:include and certainly in a host of other vocabularies. There's certainly potential for reusing a common syntax and quite a bit of common semantics here. - The idea of "importing" another document, with a somewhat vocabulary specific idea of "overriding declarations" or something, as expressed in xsl:import, xsd:import or Ant's import task. The potential of reuse is more limited but the idea might be worth a look. - The idea of a user interface link vocabulary, with possible choices for the user on the target (let's say, a book title links to a variety of online book shops), or where the user agent might use a bunch of different URLs pointing to the same content for establishing parallel downloads to overcome server bandwidth limitations. Instead of attacking the general problem, as interesting as it seems to be, some more specialized work could lead to earlier success. As for "general purpose XML linking": - Aren't ID/IDREFS links? - Does the XSD key construct establish links? - Does xsl:key/key() denote a link? - Does the XSLT document() function represent a link? It would be interesting to have a reasonable formal definition of in what a link differs from other relationships. J.Pietschmann
|
