RE: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
Regarding the issue of XML and hyperlinking, Michael Kay wrote: > The problem is the failure to distinguish a "relationship" in the > information model from a "hyperlink" as a way of presenting that > information in the presentation space. XLink/XPointer have always been > completely confused about the model/view distinction. XML doesn't need > hyperlinking functionality; it needs improved modelling of relationships. And Ben Trafford wrote: > there's no reason the substantive work done in XLink/XPointer > can't be re-used to represent a better relationship modelling, with the > presentation portions broken out to where they belong. And Simon St. Laurent wrote: > XML doesn't need hyperlinking, but the Web does. That's one key > ingredient of XML's failure to reach _beyond_ the server-side. Michael, Ben, Simon, thank you for your thoughts. Would you expand upon what you are thinking on this issue please? In your messages I see the words "relationship" and "modeling" appearing repeatedly. That seems to be a key concept. Consider this XML snippet: <BookStore> <Book> ... </Book> <Book> ... </Book> </BookStore> That snippet shows a relationship between BookStore and Book; namely, BookStore consists of Books. Is that an example of the kind of relationships you are talking about? Does XML need more kinds of relationships? Does XML need more explicit relationships? The above BookStore-Book relationship seems rather implicit and subject to various interpretations. Does XML need relationships that can extend to outside of an XML document? /Roger
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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