Re: Hyperlinks: 3.3, agree with Martin; new req. 3.4, self-revealing links.

W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> At 07:00 AM 12/21/96 -0600, Len Bullard wrote:
>                                                      IMO, HyTime
> >is baroque and has undergone many transformations that while
> >making it stronger, have left many of us bewildered about what
> >it is.
> HyTime has not changed in its fundamentals.  Appart from some
> much-needed design refinements, the only real difference between
> old HyTime and new HyTime is the grove-based underpinings by which
> everything (including DSSSL and SGML) are now defined.  But the scope
> of application, what it does, and the way it does it, have not changed.

I agree that this is so.  What I mean is that in all of the name 
changes, new descriptions, and the the grove-based underpinnings 
(which are needed), it is like starting over in ferreting out 
the details.  It isn't a bad thing, but I understand the frustration 
of some with this.

I welcome the paper you are working on.  After watching the HyTime 
process for some time, my intuition is that any attempt to do 
what HyTime does results in HyTime-Yet-Again.  So, as XML is 
a simplification of SGML to make it more friendly to the current 
Internet pipes (hollow logs instead of PVC) and base of application 
writers, a similar simplification of HyTime should do the job.

Umm... do we know what the job is yet? :-)