Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Eve L. Maler" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:50:45 -0500
Sorry to contribute only now that the thread has gone a bit stale, but...
Please be very careful. XLink's show="embed" semantic has nothing to do
with actual inclusion (where inclusion means something like "macro
substitution" or "entity resolution"). Embedding has to do with merging
the *rendering* of a link's ending resource into the starting resource,
much as HTML's IMG element blends a "remote" graphic with a "local"
document for display.
I would say that the show attribute is one of the things that makes XLink
uniquely about hyperlinking, as opposed to a generic association mechanism
such as RDF or topic maps, so I believe it makes eminent sense for that
attribute to be in the XLink namespace.
At 09:40 AM 11/9/00 +0100, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
>David Orchard wrote:
> > The two problems that I mentioned still exist. All of the attributes on
> > XLinks are specifically meant for hypertext. XInclude is very much not a
> > hypertext problem, it's a tree join in memory problem. Therefore most of
> > the attributes that XLink has created aren't appropriate for XInclude.
>Yes, you're right, XLink is heavily biased toward hypertext presentation
>and it would have been cleaner if the "show" attribute had be from
Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ east.sun.com