[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Tom,
>> But what if you had XSLT templates (or some other transformation
>> technology) describing the mapping:
>>
>> <xsl:template match="xhtml:img">
>> <xhtml:img xlink:type="extended">
>>
>> <image xlink:type="resource" xlink:label="image">
>> <xsl:value-of select="@alt" />
>> </image>
>>
>> <src xlink:href="{@src}" xlink:type="locator"
>> xlink:label="src" />
>> <go xlink:type="arc" xlink:from="image" xlink:to="src"
>> xlink:show="embed" xlink:actuate="onLoad" />
>>
>> <longdesc xlink:href="{@longdesc}" xlink:type="locator"
>> xlink:label="longdesc" />
>> <go xlink:type="arc" xlink:from="image" xlink:to="longdesc"
>> xlink:show="new" xlink:actuate="other" />
>> </xhtml:img>
>> </xsl:template>
>>
>
> With great respect to Jeni, I think that something has gotten lost
> here (I do not mean in her example, just the whole discussion the
> way it has developed). If xhtml is supposed to be a replacement or
> follow-on to more or less replace html, then its hyperlinks MUST BE
> SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND AND USE. Or at least, ordinary everyday
> hyperlinks must be. Otherwise this new facility will not get used,
> or it will be used wrongly and sour the majority of web page
> developers on using it - back to html 4.0, at least it works and we
> can understand it.
I absolutely agree, and that's why pushing the generic descriptions of
the links into a schema, rather than having them declared in the
instance, is a good idea. It means that *authors* can simply do what
they've always been doing:
<img src="my.gif" />
without having to worry about the fact that for an XLink application
to understand the img it actually has to look more like:
<img xlink:type="extended">
<image xlink:type="resource" xlink:label="image" />
<src xlink:href="my.gif" xlink:type="locator"
xlink:label="src" />
<go xlink:type="arc" xlink:from="image" xlink:to="src"
xlink:show="embed" xlink:actuate="onLoad" />
</img>
or without having to include hlink:hlink elements in their document,
or without even referencing out to those hlink:hlink elements.
As I picture it, most applications will be able to retrieve a schema
for XHTML automatically -- it might be built-in; it might be
retrievable via http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; or, if they wanted to,
users might write their own versions (though if they did I imagine
they would be copies of or redefinitions of the one at the W3C site).
As I also said, I don't think that XHTML actually needs any of this
framework for declaring the fact that certain attributes indicate
links of certain types. It's absolutely required for other, less
well-known and more declarative languages, though, and XHTML is one
good source of examples of the variety of links that you need and the
requirement for links to be recognised without adopting new attribute
names and element structures. So if we could come up with some way of
doing making these assertions in a schema (as a transformation to
XLink or through some other means) then that would be great.
Cheers,
Jeni
---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/
|
