Re: Can we be more concrete?

W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> 
> Yes, because I was using a URL directly to address the image (and not an
> entity whose system identifier was a URL), I lost the notation declaration.
>  Of course, we can depend on MIME types to make the proper association, right?

So they tell me.  I have to read the URL draft just received.

> >BTW, are you assuming the use of a URL resolver?  In the #prefix
> >convention,
> >a lot of strings are appended to the locator, and that assumes one knows
> >what strings are available.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean.  I thought use of URLs (and therefore support
> for their resolution) was a hard requirement for XML.

It is, I believe.  It comes under "gotta live with what is working".
Can't say I like the #hack.  How does this fit with the concept of 
separately storing queries so that they can be reused by multiple 
links in multiple documents? I want to point to a query multiple times 
much like a function is prototyped, then called whereever needed.

As to *available*, I am thinking about a scenario where the author 
is "blind" to the existence of multiple representations.  For example, 
the "graphic" in one system is a set of 2D drawings, in another, a 
3D model is used.  The author only knows they want to point at 
the "flywheel assembly view" so, in the first case, they have to 
locate a gif with inserts, in the second case they have to get a 
camera view.  What I want the author to use to link is the logical name 
for the part, e.g, the reference designator for the flywheel assembly.
Nothing so far indicates I can't use indirection for this.  Just 
want to point out it is needed.  Why?  Because I want to pick up 
the document and put it on a portable device not connected to 
the network.  I want the associations for the graphics on the 
portable device (might not be 3D capable) to be immediate and 
automatic.

>                               So, for management's sake, how does the
> >example look if one is pointing out of a document instance into the
> >independent link set document using a URL? Is it as simple as appending
> >the name of the linkset document plus the  link id to the URL with the
> >proviso that the linkset document handler knows to goto/gosub/spawn
> >the target?
> 
> Do you mean linking from a document to
> an independent link? 

Yes.

> You'd address it just as you would anything else: but
> note that addressing a link doesn't necessarily cause anything to happen:
> you're just addressing the link as another element.  In HyTime, at least,
> links only cause behavior when traversal between link ends happens.

Good so far.
 
>                  Sounds like a catalog.  From a management perspective,
> >BOS management is catalog management and all the document instance
> >needs to know is the name of its catalog.
> 
> I think you can think of it that way: the BOS is nothing more than a list
> of the entities that need to be examined for possible links and link ends.

Ok.  The rest seems to work as I assume it would.

len

Received on Monday, 30 December 1996 15:56:57 UTC