W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2002

RE: Architectural issue: component specifications (was More on xl ink- 23)

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 12:53:03 -0500
Message-ID: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B8E4@HQ5>
To: "'Ian B. Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>
Cc: "'www-tag@w3.org'" <www-tag@w3.org>

It should be made where the goal is to produce 
a consistent system behavior and this includes 
subsystem behaviors.  

It's in the way that you use it. 

This was the point of the "there ain't no web; just components" 
threads.  I'm unsure what is gained from "the web 
architecture" without some admission that the 
term "the web" as Fielding points out, might 
include multiple systems where the particulars 
vary, therefore, multiple architectures that 
share some properties.  

One might inquire based on XLink properties 
in what systems are these properties present.

The principle of separation of presentation and 
content is made and perhaps, overstressed.  One 
could look at the principle of separation 
of linking and location and inquire what systems 
do this and why.  This is not simply policy but 
also an issue similar to the first one of lifecycle 
and reuse.

len


-----Original Message-----
From: Ian B. Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org]

This issue is being discussed elsewhere within W3C as well.

I feel it's a policy issue rather than an architectural issue:

    Should/must all W3C specifications hencefore use the
    specification Y?

It's not clear yet where this type of policy requirement
should be made within a specification (in addition to
its technical constraints) or outside the specification.
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 13:53:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:11 GMT