Re: Anchors Aweigh
At 2:35 PM 12/28/96, len bullard wrote:
>No, this is not the XML standard; it is a way to discuss
>the XML standard for hyperlinking in examples that a
>programmer would find clear. I plead for help from
>the object programmers on the list.
I am one of the object programmers on this list. One of the problems I
see with this is that I want to know what the data is, not how someone else
thinks they should design my applications. I would be more snaguine about
OO modelling of links if I had ever:
A. Seen an object model for hypertext that more than the author agreed
B. saw any proposed, meaningful applications of inheritance in defining
the semantics of the two kinds of links we are considering (multi-end
clink, multi-end ilink).
C. any reason to apply the operational aspects (methods) of OO
programming. We don't even need "set" methods in XML, so I don't see that
OO field lists, with "get" methods only, are any different from simple
lists of attributes.
We don't need to sprinkle OO magic dust over declarative linking to make
XML fly, we just need to decide on a syntax, and some simple metadata. (I
think this is Gavin's model, and I'm not surprised that if this is so, we
are in agreement again...)
I am not a number. I am an undefined character.
David Durand email@example.com \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams
MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________