[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Len,
Len said:
Yes and no. Think about what it means to separate
the concept of a link from the concept of a locator.
Why was that done? What is the function of each?
If a locator can be addressed by multiple links,
why would one want to do that?
We come back to groves for the same reasons
the original group ended up there. Until one has
a neutral means to describe properties of nodes
in a sharable descriptive language, it is tough to
decide when we are talking about the same "type"
of thing being addressed from multiple contexts.
Didier replies:
I was referring to elements used as links. I want to be sure to
understand you well. Are you saying that links are not necessarily
associated to operations (1) or that in no case it should be associated
to an operation.
Perhaps a link is at its more abstract level simply indicates a
relationship and when mapped to an element, this latter add some
implicit or explicit operation responding to the question an interpreter
may ask (2): What do I do with this link. So to speak, a kind of href
with, as value, a locator or a name that could be resolved into a
location in addition to other attributes (including the element's name)
that help the interpreter to know what to do with that link.
(1) I agree on the abstract level since I may indicated just a
relationship to be interpreted with one or more semantics dependent on
the interpreter.
(2) You know interpreters are like 4 years old kids, they ask a lot of
question and do not clean their mess :-) :-)
cheers
Didier PH Martin
|
