W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > February 1997

Re: 3.1 b-h: Link contents question matrix

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 97 15:40:31 GMT
Message-Id: <5653.199702211540@grogan.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
>  Dimension 1: Which pieces of information should be specified for
>  possible inclusion in linking elements?
>  b. Type
>  c. Role
>  d. locator
>  e. caption
>  g. locator scheme (e.g. URL, FPI, TEI locator)

All of those, i.e. NOT 'behaviour', and no others.

>  For each of the pieces of information to be included in linking
>  elements, the following questions apply:
>  (i)  should it be optional or required?

All optional except locator.

>  (ii) should it be associated with links or allowed to vary per locator?

Type is per link element, locator and scheme per explicit resource
(i.e. one in (simple) links, one per locator element in mlinks);
caption and role per resource (i.e. two in links (see previous message
about name collision) and one per locator element in mlinks).

> (iii)should it be carried in the GI, in an attribute name, or in an attribute
>       name-value pair?

All in av-pairs.

>  (iv) should we predefine a set of values?

Type:  no, just a syntax, as before: a(.a)*
Role:  ditto.
Locator scheme: a minimum set, not closed.
Locator: no, just a syntax per scheme, by reference to relevant standard
Caption: CDATA

>  (v)  if so, should we provide a mechanism for "subclassing"?

Implicit in answers above.

>  (vi) should we allow the use of values other than those predefined or
>      subclasses thereof?


Received on Friday, 21 February 1997 10:40:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:07 UTC