• From: Tatu Saloranta <cowtowncoder@y...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:58:05 -0700 (PDT)

--- Ben Trafford <ben@p...> wrote:

> 
> At 12:59 PM 9/22/2006, Len Bullard wrote:
> >And if the purpose of a given link is NOT to send a
> resource to a rendering
> >application, what then?
> 
>          Then it's irrelevant to the process of what
> to do with it 
> after its modelled. I don't believe you can
> reasonably standardize 
...
>          The primary purpose of XLink was to display
> links in a 
> rendering context. That's my point of interest in
> this discussion. 

If that was and is the main goal XLink might as well
be dead. And perhaps even good riddance.
That part definitely can be resolved at higher level.

But what many (most?) developers really would be
interested in is basic level of relationship
semantics. Even without knowing exact semantics (which
can be refined by specific xml vocabulary), there are
useful things one can do regarding information
extraction, given some basic relationship information.

-+ Tatu +-


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

• References:
  • RE: Xlink Isn't Dead
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@p...>