Re: Section 0: Naming
At 3:19 PM 2/3/97, Tim Bray wrote:
>It dawned on me that since I co-drafted the spec, I ought to have the
>courtesy to put in a pitch for the status quo on all these section 1
>At 11:08 AM 31/01/97 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>>0.1 What should the title of the spec be?
>>0.2 What should the generic term or acronym we use to reference whatever
>> it is the spec describes?
>(a) I don't think that XML-Link is euphonious or memorable, and
>(b) XML is not exactly a name to conjure with (yet), and
>(c) It is *important* that what we build operate with, and be advised as
> operating with, SGML and HTML.
>Thus I would favor the current title, "Extended Hyper Linkage" and the
>acronym XHL; the theory is that it sounds enough like XML that we can
>spin the XML+XHL story when that is what the people want, and is nonetheless
>distinct, which would avoid giving the impression that you can't use it
>in SGML or HTML. - Tim
Well, this argument seems very good to me, but I didn't pick it up in my
readind. _I_ at least finished the spec with no thought that it was
intended for use with SGML or HTML. Now that I double check, I see that the
draft actually says SGML where I _read_ XML. (I think I may have thought
that it was an editing error). I think that an explicit list including at
least XML and SGML would help to highlight the intended universal
applicability, especially to densoids like myself.
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 \__________________________