OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@east.sun.com>
  • To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • 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
>another namespace.

Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ east.sun.com


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS