[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: 3.1 b-h: BEHAVIOR



Tim wrote:
| So, we ended up with (c). The ERB consensus is that there will be two
| attributes specified to control behavior; the names and values given 
| below are provisional.

| NEW - means that upon traversal of the link, the indicated resource should
|  be displayed or processed in a new context, not affecting that of the
|  resource where the traversal started (e.g. like HTML <A TARGET="NEW" [I 
|  think])

Not in HTML 3.2.  Starts a new instance of the display?

| There will be an attribute named ACTUATE, which may have one of three values:
| 
| AUTO - means that the link should be traversed and used when encountered;
|  that the display or processing of the resource where the traversal
|  started is not considered complete until this is done (e.g. HTML <IMG)
| USER - means that the link should not be traversed until there is an
|  explicit external request for this to happen (e.g. HTML <A)
| PUSH - means that the resource is volatile, subject to change, and 
|  should be processed immediately and continuously.

Re PUSH, is it the processor or the application that determines how often
to ask for refreshing of the target?  or is the idea that the app should
update the display when it gets pushed?  I'm not sure of all the ways
this differs from AUTO.

| Notes:
|  a. HTML <A is equivalent to SHOW="REPLACE" ACTUATE="USER"
|  b. HTML <IMG is equivalent to SHOW="INCLUDE" ACTUATE="AUTO"
|  c. Obviously, it is legal for user-agents to ignore these settings and
|     do as they will; for example, turning image loading off.

It is not obvious that this is legal, as the SGML ERB may chose any
policy it wants in this connection.  User agents may be configured
to do as they will, but there is no value in labelling all arbitrary
behavior as XML conformant.  I'm sure I've lost on this point, but 
I'll just point out that if the XML spec's conformance section doesn't
specify that these settings should be respected (better, MUST be
respected), then the publisher desiring integrity of his information
will be forced to negotiate on some other basis, which may not be
what is most desired:

"Hi, I want your foo."  "Who are you?"  "I'm an XML-conformant
application."  "Go away."  "Okay, I'm the BrandName XML Publisher's
Delight XML-conformant application."  "Why didn't you say so to begin
with?  Here's foo."

Separately, I think it would be wise to say a few words detailing
the nine combinations:  AUTO and REPLACE is kinda interesting, for
example.  Wrt INCLUDE, there is some ambiguity as to what conditions
attach:  is the target's own style sheet used, or is the target
processed as if it were part of the targeting document?


Regards,
  Terry Allen    Electronic Publishing Consultant    tallen[at]sonic.net
       specializing in Web publishing, SGML, and the DocBook DTD 
                   http://www.sonic.net/~tallen/
  A Davenport Group Sponsor:  http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html