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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] TAG on HLink

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

At 11:49 AM 9/27/2002 +0100, Norman Gray wrote:
>Would XLink 1.1 be reasonable?  HLink and XLink, though they share the
>underlying ideas, are syntactically very different.  It doesn't seem
>sensible to ram both of them into the same specification.

         I can see your point. However, the concepts work together. XLink 
was intended to have an attribute remapping aspect, we just couldn't figure 
out how to do it. Remember, these were back in the days of "pure XML" when 
it was viewed as the panacea for all problems. From my perspective, the 
XLink WG would have gotten slapped down had they suggested an approach like 
Steven Pemberton's.

         The political climate in the XML world is a little different these 
days. I think the concepts of HLink could be subsumed into XLink.

>Would it not be better, therefore, to drop the current XLink completely
>and simply call HLink `XLink 2.0', since it doesn't really seem to
>have too much to do with XHTML.

         No, I doubt it would work. A lot of us XLink fans would probably 
be a little upset. It also doesn't make any sense, since HLink's semantics 
are based on XLink, not separate from it. Do you see any definition of 
'actuate' in the HLink spec? Me, neither.

>and know what it's expected to do with it.  However, your description
>of it as merely `really quite nice' suggests that there's a use-case
>here for which XLink's practice of scattering special attributes is
>an adequate solution.  What am I missing?

         You're missing people like me, who like linkbases, and links that 
are embedded right in the document. Attribute remapping has always struck 
me as messy. Necessary, but messy. For example, let's say I want to style 
those links (i.e. add behaviour): instead of a processor going through the 
document, finding the link, recognizing it, and styling it, we now have to 
process through an attribute remapping definition, then through the 
document. Sounds awfully similar to validating a DTD to me; what if I just 
want well-formedness, and to parse the links directly through a link 
processor and a style processor?

         People seem to have the opinion that XLink was never meant to 
include attribute remapping, or that the group just ignored it. Neither is 
the case. Attribute remapping was one of the original goals; and we did a 
lot of work on it. We just couldn't figure out a way to do it that would go 
over cleanly.



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

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