- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 12:53:19 -0800
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 12:33 PM 3/4/97 -0800, Tim Bray wrote: >5.1.a Shall we support a mechanism for a document to contain a list of >other documents that someone thinks ought to processed with it, in order >to find linking elements pointing into the first document, and in general >create a web of related documents? Yes. We may not be able to specify the great BOS in the sky - in Steve Newcomb's terms, to assert that every resource must know it's a resource - but the benefits are immense and it's easy. >5.1.b If so, shall we say anything normative about whether this must be >done? Maybe not "must be done", but if done, I think it must be respected. Why not? Obviously unenforceable, but if we provide a mechanism for info-providers to assert their choices in this area, then products to be called compliant should respect those choices. >5.1.c Should we use an SGML element, a PI, or some other construct to hold >this list of documents? >5.1.d If we use an element, what should it be called? >5.1.e If we use an SGML element, should we have subelements per referenced >doc or just a token-separated list of entity names in a single attribute? >In either case what should the subelement (if any) and attributes be >called? I like the way it is in the draft spec. -T.
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 1997 15:54:46 UTC