Re: 3.1 b-h: BEHAVIOR

Henry Thompson writes:
| Sorry to go on so long, but if we're going to do this at all we need
| to be clear what we're doing.  I think in fact groves provide the only
| sensible way to specify what we mean in an application-neutral way.
| So let's try that, using the name SNODE for the node in the grove of
| class Element which instantiates the linking element we're concerned with:
| INCLUDE:  On actuation, replace the content of SNODE with the grove
| fragment (one or more nodes) which instantiates the target resource.

Does this make sense as following from the above:

If these groves have already been built by the parser, then this is
something the application does.  If the link points to something
that wasn't fetched and parsed when the original document was
parsed, groved, and dealt with by the application, then the application
has to obtain the resource, and pass it to the parser, then the
application has to insert in the SNODE the grove fragment instantiating
the target resource.

However, if ACTUATE=AUTO, does the parser act upon this information
without involving the application?

| REPLACE:  On actuation, replace SNODE (or (grove-root SNODE), see
| above) with the node (must be exactly one) which instantiates the
| target resource.

Pretty much the same except that it's a wholesale swap.  In both
cases the link info is interpreted by the application.

| NEW:  On actuation, construct a new grove which instantiates the
| target resource.

Pretty much the same as obtaining a resource in the first place.

(I am pressing on this issue because XML 1.0 say what a processor
should do but not an application; here we seem to be talking about 
instructions to the application.  That's okay with me, but I don't
have a strong impression that my interpretation is widely shared.

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