[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Tim,
>> * There's no concept of a link that is part of a form
>Well true, but there's no notion of a link that is part of a fish or a
bicycle either.
Forms are somewhat more widely deployed on the Web than fish and bicycles
:-)
Google would be a heck of a lot harder to use without forms. I would go as
far as saying the Web as we know it wouldn't exist without forms. This is a
major use case.
>>.. discussion on <object> with three separate linking behaviors ...
>Indeed, the XLink encoding for that would require three subelements
>...Why is packing it all into attributes of a single element a
>better design?
Two things: 1. In XLink, there's actuate="onRequest" and that's it. There's
no way to distinguish between different levels of user request action, in my
example the difference between a request to follow a link and the request to
view longdesc information.
2. More generally, a common design pattern is to use elements to represent
"things", and attributes to represent properties of those things. In many
cases, the 'link-ness' that needs to be described is a property or
annotation, not a thing. It should be possible to express this natural
structure and still use links.
>>Complex links can't nest properly
>I wasn't aware of that, can you illustrate the problem?
I was thinking of this:
<quote cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#extended-link";>
Subelements of the simple or extended type anywhere inside a parent
extended-type element have no XLink-specified meaning. Subelements of the
locator, arc, or resource type that are not direct children of an
extended-type element have no XLink-specified meaning.
</quote>
This would seem to preclude nested things, like the <object> tag in XHTML2.
Even splitting out the link parts as subelements wouldn't help:
object element that attempts to load a quicktime movie
object element that attempts to load a SVG animation
object element that loads a JPG image/
/object
/object
Is 'xlink:href' purely an aesthetic issue? I don't know.
But I do hear authors complain about having to type the "long" namespace
declaration, and when they mistakenly type 'href' instead of 'xlink:href',
unhappiness about a silent failure mode.
I see a need for something like HLink. With cooperation and a little luck,
it can complement rather than contradict XLink.
Thanks,
.micah
-- another big snip --
|
