- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:42:47 -0500
- To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, W3C OWL Chairs <team-owl-chairs@w3.org>, public-wiki-dev@w3.org, sysreq@w3.org
On Nov 19, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>
> Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Looks pretty nice!
>>
>> Minor: The [] would normally be part of the link.
>
> hmmm? not in the W3C specs I see, like
> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
OK. (ugly...)
Doesn't work the way, e.g. Endnote does.
>> Nicety: The footnote version uses a ^ to link back to the place that
>> cited the reference.
>
> The problem is that there might be multiple {{ref}}s for a single
> {{refdef}}, so which one gets linked to? We could have two kinds of
> {{ref}}, one of which must be used exactly once, and the other of
> which
> is used when you want additional uses. {{ref2}} for secondary
> references? These usage constraints should be checked by any decent
> HTML checker...
I wouldn't sweat it. Just link back to the first one, is my guess.
Footnote gets around it by having the footnote defined by exactly ref.
Subsequent refs are presumably ignored for linkback (I'm too lazy to
check if this is true). Will be helpful enough of the time...
-Alan
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 04:58:34 UTC