[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
That was the point I made in the Vancouver speech
at the first hytime conference. I even wrote a
formula out for it because it had to include
the notion of time (linking into a process)
given a dynamic system.
There is a straightforward analogy of view to
query to hyperlink to function. Given a decent
relational backend, the hypertext goes back to
being ThinGUI. Consider what a completely
non-inlined system would look like, or just
pull out the old Windows GUI description files.
A view and topical link look an awful lot alike
is the link is just a control over a query. As
asked in a thread two weeks ago, what is the advantage
of a topic map over a query? Why are most linking
tools considered mostly at the presentation layer?
To click on a query. They are controls. It is
one reason I am not sanguine about requiring
namespaces as the total solution for glueing
aggregates together. URIs are system identifiers.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean.mcgrath@propylon.com]
I had cause recently to muse that the database concept of a "view" is one
of the more powerful ideas we somehow lost in the headlong rush to XML
content/presentation dualism.
Come back database view technology: all is forgiven
http://www.propylon.com/html/knowledge/Come_Back_Database_View_Technology_All_is_Forgiven_20020919.html
|
