Re: Radical cure for BOS confusion
[Martin Bryan, responding to Terry Allen:]
| >And, idly, must the ilinks in the pointed-to link set be anchored in the
| >document from which the pointing was done?
| God forbid. They must be able to point to any two external documents
| that need to be connected together if they are to be stored
| independently of the data they are pointing to. The interesting
| question is whether we allow text in the file containing the links to
| act as comments on why the links were created.
One of the advantages that I thought we might get out of confining
ilinks to special documents of a single standardized type is the
chance to specify standard information that could be included in a
collection of ilinks -- for example, comments on why the links were
created, or owner, or revision history, or whatever.
In other words, part of the tradeoff in going for what looks like a
much easier to implement ilink mechanism (the fixed doctype alone
should make tool construction simpler) is that we would have to do
some pretty careful design work on just what kind of things should be
included in a link set. One of the things that emboldens me to make
this suggestion in the first place is the estimation that we have the
collective experience to do that.