[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Quick edit
- From: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>
- To: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 20:11:10 -0500
> > (mind you, with every day that goes by, I'm becoming more in favor of
> > nuking content-type, but let's see what other people say).
> Yeah I've been reconsidering this also. ...
> we could to a http://www.rddl.org/content-types.htm RDDL which stuffs the
> content-type in the xlink:title and maps based on that.
I've created http://www.rddl.org/content-type.htm. But also I've placed a
few resources at the bottom of the spec http://www.rddl.org/.
There are a couple of ways to do this (map an arcrole URI to a literal
string), first the xlink:href can point to a div or span tag which contains
<p>... <span id="JAR">application/java-archive</span> ...</p>
or perhaps the xlink:title can hold a literal string in which case the
<p> ... </p>
the role #literal or http://www.rddl.org/#literal can refer to a literal
string 'resource' which would be the value of the xlink:title attribute...
it also could be the content of the element if no title is present. In this
case no xlink:href is present.
What is saying is that this namespace has, not only a set of resources, but
also a literal string content-type: application/java-archive.
We are also saying that there are two roles: "#resource" for resources and
"#literal" for literal strings.
If this works, then the attribute 'content-type' becomes totally redundant
in terms of storing any useful information.
> > The new resources, including the ZIP, are cool. Once you get your
> > java interface worked out (I've seen nothing to disagree with
> > yet) that can go in there too.
I think it is useful to develop a spec and implementation in parallel. It
provides an incentive to keep things simple :-)