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? :-)