- From: <streich@austin.sar.slb.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 96 14:52:56 CDT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org, dgd@cs.bu.edu
> I think the problem here is the assumption that the browser _must_ expand > the entity if it _can_ expand the entity. I advocate a different approach, > where a browser would have "transclude-if-convenient" semantics. So an > external entity reference might be rendered as an expandable link, like the > links in the old OWL product. The browser could automatically follow small > external entities, and link-ify large ones. This behavior is incompatible > with validation, but a non-validating parser would not care about this. I like this approach. The only problem with it that I can see is that you would have to parse the external piece in order to get the formatting straight since you don't know what the missing siblings/children are. There is also the issue of missing IDs. I really don't see any significant difference between entities and other forms of transclusion--the semantics are the same only the syntax is different. bob
Received on Thursday, 24 October 1996 15:54:23 UTC