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

RE: After XQuery, are we done?

• To: "'Michael Kay'" <michael.h.kay@n...>, "DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO)" <bob.ducharme@l...>, "'Jonathan Robie'" <jonathan.robie@d...>, "'XML Developers List'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• From: "DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO)" <bob.ducharme@l...>
• Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:56:33 -0400

Michael Kay wrote:

>> you can put down "XML Linking." 
>
>No thankyou.
>
>Hyperlinks belong in the user interface space, XML should represent 
>information independently of the user interface. It was always
architecturally 
>wrong to do hyperlinking at the XML level and the attempt should not be
repeated.
>
>"Modelling relationships in XML" - that would be different.

I completely agree. That's why I said "XML Linking" and not "XML
Hyperlinking."  I think that modeling relationships is a bit ambitious,
though; a "model" makes me think of an ordered structure of components.
Perhaps "representing relationships" would be the lower-hanging fruit, but
we don't need a new standard to say that resource X has relationship Y to
resource Z; we've got RDF for that.

Bob

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: After XQuery, are we done?
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why *is* XQuery taking so long?
• Next by Date: RE: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: After XQuery, are we done?)
• Previous by thread: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Next by thread: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread