RE: XLink: behavior must go!

Paul Prescod wrote:
>
> Jonathan Borden wrote:
> >
> >     Is there anything within XLink itself that cannot be
> replaced by XSLT
> > now that doc() and docref() have been defined? Does XLink not become
> > something akin to a standard set of XSLT templates used for handling URI
> > traversal? doc() and docref(), as well as unification with XPointer turn
> > XSLT into a generalized graph transformation language. Could
> the XLink spec
> > itself become an XSLT include file?
>
> Yes. I outlined the features that XSL would require in order to allow link
> recognition in the first message. It must be possible to ask the XSL
> processor whether an element is an anchor (not a link), what the other
> anchors are and what the properties of the linking element are. In other
> words the XSL processor must itself be able to recognize and traverse
> links.
>

	Would something like this work?


	<xsl:template name="example">
		<xsl:param-variable name="link-param" />

		<xsl:copy-of
select="doc($link-param/link[@type='x']/@href)/html//a[@name='predicates']"
/>
	</xsl:template>

	<xsl:call-template name="example">
		<xsl:param name="link-param">
			<link @type="x" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xslt"/>
			<link @type="y" href="..." />
		</xsl:param>
	</xsl:call-template>


Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list