Re: Relationship Taxonomy Questions
Agree completely on the below - Terry
From firstname.lastname@example.org Thu Jan 23 19:38 PST 1997
Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:30:36 -0500
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:34:23 -0800
From: bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM (Jon Bosak)
Subject: Re: Relationship Taxonomy Questions
X-Mailing-List: <email@example.com> archive/latest/2558
| And in response to Jon's clear statement, I certainly don't want to
| forbid him from taking this approach, and there is nothing in XML 1.0
| to prevent him from using it, but I don't want to be *required* to use it.
| Put another way, I need to be able to bind link behavior to my document,
| and I want to be able to describe relationships that do not map
| to behaviors.
I think that we're in complete agreement on this part.
When I send you XML data ("you" being a human, a browser application,
or a nonbrowser application), I want to be able to:
1. Specify the behavior without telling you what I mean, or
2. Say what I mean and let you figure out what to do with it, or
3. Specify the behavior and tell you what I mean, but require that you
follow the specified behavior regardless of what you think about it,
4. Specify the behavior and tell you what I mean and let you make up
your own mind about whether to follow the specified behavior.
As the content provider, I want all of these options.
Note that what I have just said applies to both the linking and the
non-linking parts of the document and for the same reasons.