At 10:15 AM 12/21/96 -0800, Terry Allen wrote:
>>Hell, I want general transclusion a la Xanadu...
>which is another linking behaviour that the Web already has...
>IMG was bad enough (from this angle); FRAMEs are dreadful...

Don't want to be pedantic, but this after all is a discussion of hypermedia
so we should get our terms straight.  I *think* transclusion means inclusion, 
not just of another document, but of an arbitrary segment of another document, 
in Nelson's scheme all done by byte offset, but the key point is you're 
pulling in a piece of something else.  I think what the web does now with 
<img> and <frame> is inclusion rather than transclusion.

All this is orthogonal to Terry's point that silently including someone
else's stuff raises some difficult and important issues in the area
of intellectual property rights.

Since I dragged in Ted Nelson's name, it turns out he hasn't stopped 
thinking about this stuff... check out 


in particular the "transcopyright" idea.

 - Tim