Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] A modest hyperlinking proposal
 Tim Bray: >I want the markup to explicit and self-documenting I will agree with this, although it does raise some interesting issues (like, are DTD defaulted attributes still "explicit" and "self-documenting"??) Anyway.. There's really two major kinds of hypertext linking: the equivalent of html <a>, and the equivalent of html <img> (or <object>). Could this be the 80/20 point? What if there were two new kinds of simple links, both identified by a single attribute: xml:href for <a>-style links xml:src for <img>-style links The xml prefix is chosen because >I think links have special importance to the Web The presence of either of these single attributes indicates a link between the local element and the remote resource indicated. It does _not_ provide any hard guidance on what to do with the link (thus no 'show' & 'embed' attributes). User agents are free to (as they do now) interpret and process the link in whatever way makes sense. This also, I believe, addresses the HTML Working Group's objection to having the limit of a single attribute per type. While it's true that there can still be at most a single xml:href attribute, there is also only a single way to do the default activation of a link. Similarly for xml:src, there is only a single source of content for the link. Many other kinds of links, like to security descriptors, etc. would be considered outside the scope of XLink and thus could use attributes named anything at all, avoiding conflicts. Combined with something like local-extended [1], I could see a solution along these lines meeting the needs of the HTML guys, and everybody else. For linkbases and more complicated extended links, XLink 1.0 of course continues to be the best way to go. Thanks, .micah [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Sep/0291.html -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 10:22 AM To: Eric van der Vlist Cc: xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: limits of the generic On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 10:13 AM, Eric van der Vlist wrote: >> Personally, it's not an interesting solution to me because I want >> links to be manifest even in well-formed documents that don't have a >> W3C XML Schema, let alone documents that use other schema >> technologies. > > I don't want to be nasty, but can't this be interpreted as defining > limits to what the PSVI can be used for and denying its implicit claim > to be generic which was (as far as I can remember since this thread is > becoming difficult to follow) Simon's initial point? I'm 100% with Norm. I want the markup to explicit and self-documenting, as opposed to off in the PSVI which you only compute by fetching another (potentially large & complex) resource and processing it. I have grave concerns about the PSVI in general and its "implicit claims to be generic" in particular. > You want links to be manifest in well formed documents because links > are > obviously important to you but couldn't I want the same for any other > type which is important to me? Yep, but I think links have special importance to the Web and should be manifest in documents used on the Web. -Tim ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> 
|
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
|
|||||||||
