[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 18:52, Michael Kay wrote:
>
> You're taking a document perspective, and you're probably right that in the
> document world, one is talking about people communicating with people, and
> this makes it difficult to divorce structure from presentation entirely. I
> think this applies to the whole markup space and is not unique to linking.
+1. And in support of Ben's position too.
I use <programlisting> (almost) simply because I know how it will be
presented when styled by the docbook stylesheets.
>
> But XML is about abstracting away from the presentation as much as one
> possibly can, and to my mind XLink doesn't do that.
Are you forgetting the pragmatist Michael?
I.e. I really don't care about abstractions, I want XYZ, and marking
up content in this certain way gets my XYZ, whatever that might be.
I don't understand abstractions; I do understand the 4pm deadline.
I was really impressed with Paul Prescods ideas on link databases in his
XML handbook. I found that really enticing.
Like you I found nothing in XLINK which had that enticement.
Nor in any browser, style language or anything since which realised
Pauls 'future'.
>
> Part of the problem, I think, is the focus on URIs as identifiers
Lets leave that to TAG :-)
They seem to be locked into this topic over the last n weeks.
Ubergeeks lost in philosophical meanderings heading towards
their own fundaments.
> Even in the document world, authors should be encouraged to write
> <postcode>RG4 7BS</postcode> without too much thought about the fact that in
> one particular application, hovering the mouse over it might show you a map.
Your first message in this thread intimated you had ideas on how XML
markup might be added to 'style' (or otherwise process) such items to
move towards the ideas of XLINK....
I'd love to hear them, or anyone elses.
Linkbase processors could be fun!
--
Regards DaveP.
XSLT&Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl
|
