Re: SkunkLink: a skunkworks XML linking proposal
ziggy@p... (Adam Turoff) writes: >> I'd love to have out-of-line linking someday, but don't consider >> XLink's approach to that particularly sensible either. (Yes, I'm >> working on more positive proposals. The XLink WG is dead. Long >> live - or get started - XML hypertext linking!) > >I've heard the praise and hype for HyTime and out-of-line linking, >but I can't say as I've seen a single practical need for it. What >would a sensible out-of-line linking language provide that >SkunkLink+RDF (or the moral equivalent) *can't* provide? My primary problem with RDF, XLink, and their current moral equivalents is their obsession with URIs as magic identifiers. I've stated a number of times that I find working with RDF quite painful because it seems to believe that URIs are the one true identifier for everything, and so I'd much prefer to work with a dedicated linking vocabulary - but then I also find that XLink is not a very good linking vocabulary. Most of my complaints about XLink arise because it crams all kinds of things into namespaced attributes, and then it repeats RDF's mistake of using URIs as identifiers for roles and arcroles. The net result is either unreadable sludge or a vocabulary that hides much of its content behind defaulted attributes, which have their own charming reliability problems. URIs also have some serious drawbacks for hypertext linking, especially if for some reason an application (typically an application performing some kind of embedding) needs control over the content type, language, or other media feature of the representation it retrieves. XLink and pretty much every other W3C specification just plain punts on these issues: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Dec/0260.html For inline linking, I don't mind punting - I don't likely have the room for precise control, though maybe it can be done in an attribute if somebody adds the functionality. If I'm going to go to the trouble of setting up external linkbases and trying to build vaguely usable systems, however, it would be nice to be able to have a conversation about content negotiation that extends a bit beyond "throw me whatever you like." XLink is too complicated for the truly simple stuff and too [limited? / naive? / attribute-twisted? / URI-blinded?] for the harder stuff. From my perspective, it's a good clean miss of any 80/20 point whatsoever. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format