- From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 13:16:22 -0500
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 8:17 AM 2/4/97, Jon Bosak wrote: >I'm the token minimalist on this subject, but in the case of >"traverse" I think we should take advantage of the existence of a term >that precisely describes what we mean and isn't already grossly >overloaded. > >Jon I disagree, because traverse exactly implies _less_ than I want to do with links. I don't consider it helpful to use the word traversal for the rendering of footnotes, or the creation of local link maps without fetching documents, or the associationg of glosses with original texts in multi-lingual documents. Traversal implies that there's only one thing to do with a link -- GOTO, and that's a very limiting view. -- David I am not a number. I am an undefined character. _________________________________________ David Durand dgd@cs.bu.edu \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams --------------------------------------------\ http://dynamicDiagrams.com/ MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 1997 13:15:44 UTC