- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 15:47:51 -0800
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
All this discussion has been quite educational, but the proportion of it that I can relate to the problems that I as co-editor will soon be facing is kind of low. I think it's time for a strawman. If nobody else advances one I will, but others may find this disturbing coming from one who frankly admits failure to understand the relevancy of any number of the issues in question. To make it concrete (and I apologize to those who are reading this particular example for the second time, I sent it to someone, but not *I think* the SGML-WG): At SGML'96 this outfit had a multimedia authoring system called "Nereus". They had some circuit board photos and you could click on the parts and a little menu would pop up saying Locate Part Show Measurements Describe Part and they all did the obvious things. This was nothing more than a multi-ended link, accessible from some, not all, of its ends, each link having a defined role and label, and a defined behavior. I can imagine a syntax to describe this level of functionality, with a handy basket of boiler-plate roles and behaviors, and simple rules for rolling your own. I can imagine documenting this with a little DTD with elements & attributes beginning "-XML-". I can imagine defining some architectural meta-DTD stuff to allow you to do this in any old SGML document. I can imagine not writing any addressing mechanisms in beyond URL and ID attribute. I think this could all be written down in a dozen pages. I think it could be implemented by the XML's nominal CS grad in XML's nominal week. I think this could be awfully useful, and it would be substantially better than what our web brethren live with today. But it wouldn't say anything about object orientation or anchor awareness or pseudo-nodes or grove plans or stylesheets. To conclude, and I apologize for bluntness: I *suspect* that some of this discussion consists of handwaving, and I *know* that some of it is vitally important, and I can't tell the difference, and I think we need to enrich our diet with healthy servings of examples and draft spec language. Happy New Year, Tim
Received on Sunday, 29 December 1996 19:16:59 UTC