Re: [xml-dev] Xlink Isn't Dead

["Peter Hunsberger" <peter.hunsberger@gmail.com>]

On 9/26/06, Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>
> Which is why the Microsoft solution of attaching event handlers via the
> style sheet and the namespace works so well.  It completes the declaration
> of the control type by the event it receives and declares the handler
> (function) to fire on receiving the event.   In other words, it recognizes
> that:
>
>
> 1. Link rendering is style rendering in terms of the objects/conrols the
> container renders.  Any rendered object that receives events is by
> definition, a control.  An association, on the other hand, such as "an
> author is a person" is just an assertion.   It need not be rendered; it just
> has to be stored.
>
> 2. Associating a semantic to an event received is a late binding processs
>

Although Microsoft may have got these two aspects more-or-less correct
they unfortunately did so with an implementation that gives you poor
reusability.  It's been a while since I attempted to use their
implementation but as I recall event mapping is cumbersome and there
is very little capability to exploit any kind of polymorphism.  In
particular, one should be able to define parameters (dynamic and
static) that are passed with the event notification to the handler, a
feature that is completely missing in the MS implementation.

<snip/>

> The semantic problem is an object model problem.  In fact, the linking problems go away if > one approaches them from an object model.  That is old news everywhere.

Apparently, Microsoft did not get the memo, even simple includes are
missing, least of all inheritance....

<snip/>
-- 
Peter Hunsberger