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

RE: Quick edit

• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 20:11:10 -0500

Tim,

> >
> > (mind you, with every day that goes by, I'm becoming more in favor of
> > nuking content-type, but let's see what other people say).
>
> Yeah I've been reconsidering this also. ...
> we could to a http://www.rddl.org/content-types.htm RDDL which stuffs the
> content-type in the xlink:title and maps based on that.

I've created http://www.rddl.org/content-type.htm. But also I've placed a
few resources at the bottom of the spec http://www.rddl.org/.

There are a couple of ways to do this (map an arcrole URI to a literal
string), first the xlink:href can point to a div or span tag which contains
the text:

<rddl:resource
	xlink:title="application/java-archive"
	xlink:role="#resource"
	xlink:arcrole="#content-type"
	xlink:href="#JAR"
	>
	<p>... <span id="JAR">application/java-archive</span> ...</p>
</rddl:resource>

or perhaps the xlink:title can hold a literal string in which case the
xlink:role="#literal"

<rddl:resource
	id="JAR"
	xlink:title="application/java-archive"
	xlink:role="#literal"
	xlink:arcrole="#content-type"
	>
	<p> ... </p>
</rddl:resource>

the role #literal or http://www.rddl.org/#literal can refer to a literal
string 'resource' which would be the value of the xlink:title attribute...
it also could be the content of the element if no title is present. In this
case no xlink:href is present.

What is saying is that this namespace has, not only a set of resources, but
also a literal string content-type: application/java-archive.

We are also saying that there are two roles: "#resource" for resources and
"#literal" for literal strings.

If this works, then the attribute 'content-type' becomes totally redundant
in terms of storing any useful information.

> >
> > The new resources, including the ZIP, are cool.  Once you get your
> > java interface worked out (I've seen nothing to disagree with
> > yet) that can go in there too.

I think it is useful to develop a spec and implementation in parallel. It
provides an incentive to keep things simple :-)

-Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Quick edit
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• References:
  • RE: Quick edit
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Unprefixed attribute names in RDF
• Next by Date: RE: RDDL API
• Previous by thread: RE: Quick edit
• Next by thread: Re: Quick edit
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread