W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > March 1997

Re: 5.2 Linking element corrals?

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 12:53:21 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970305125038.009571c0@pop.intergate.bc.ca>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 12:33 PM 3/4/97 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>The premise is that since extended links are independent of their
>resources, they can be difficult to find.  One solution is to
>corral them into one spot, either within a document or in a special
>external document.
>
>5.2.a Should we provide an element to serve as a corral for extended
>linking elements?

Yes

>5.2.b If so, should we require its use? 

No

>5.2.c If we allow but not require its use, should we require that if the 
>corral is used, there be no extended linking elements outside it? 

Yes.  Otherwise worthless

>5.2.e Should we specify LINKSET documents, i.e. external entities
>existing only to contain extended link corrals.

Redundant... if you have an xlink corrall, then you can have a document
containing just an xlink corrall - so you got this in effect.

>5.2.f If we specify LINKS and/or LINKSETS, should we discuss the temporal 
>effectivity and user-visibility of the links therein, in terms of the 
>period the document is "open"?

No.  I think it's hard to get this right; if we're clean on the semantics
of what it *means*, that should be enough. -T.
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 1997 15:54:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:22 UTC