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

RE: xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type

• From: "Toby Considine" <Toby.Considine@gmail.com>
• To: "'Rushforth, Peter'" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
• Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:16:58 -0400

I agree that is how it has traditionally been considered.

We had to wrestle with this problem in WS-Calendar, in which services are
scheduled and service entry points and XML documents are intertwined with
iCalendar information (RFC5545) in ways compatible with xCal (RFC6321). The
use cases to extend this model using ITIP-based syndication are many and
varied. We came up with an ugly substitution group in which an interval can
contain a payload (application-specific xml derived from an abstract
calendar type), OR an XLINK (if the reference was to somewhere else) OR an
XPATH (so the reference could be to somewhere else in the same message /
document set) OR an XMLANY. The XPATH approach is most desirable when used
as part of messaging-based communications, while the xlink approach makes
more sense for RESTful approaches. That portion of the spec epitomized the
aphorism that standards work is the selection between the odious and the
unpalatable.

IF there is work to codify / clean up /improve XLINKs, THEN this should be
part of the use cases.


"If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker

Toby Considine
TC9, Inc
TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar
TC Editor: EMIX, EnergyInterop
U.S. National Inst. of Standards and Tech. Smart Grid Architecture Committee

  
Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104
http://www.tcnine.com/
blog: www.NewDaedalus.com



-----Original Message-----
From: Rushforth, Peter [mailto:Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca] 
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 9:59 AM
To: Toby Considine
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE:  xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type

Hi Toby,

Thanks for your response. I don't think I understand your message.

I'm not talking about addressing within a document but between documents, on
the web, using URIs. 

I don't think XPath is in scope in other words.

Cheers,
Peter



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
> Toby Considine
> Sent: April 13, 2012 09:54
> To: 'Andrew Welch'; Rushforth, Peter
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE:  xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type
> 
> If one were to go down this path, relative addressing, as in xpath, 
> would need to be in the mix.
> 
> I find that when I use these constructs, though, I confuse users.
> 
> 
> "If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well" 
> - Peter Drucker
> 
> Toby Considine
> TC9, Inc
> TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar
> TC Editor: EMIX, EnergyInterop
> U.S. National Inst. of Standards and Tech. Smart Grid Architecture 
> Committee
> 
>   
> Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
> Phone: (919)619-2104
> http://www.tcnine.com/
> blog: www.NewDaedalus.com
> 
> 

• References:
  • xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type
    • From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
  • Re: xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
  • RE: xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type
    • From: "Toby Considine" <Toby.Considine@gmail.com>
  • RE: xml:href, xml:rel and xml:type
    • From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>