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

Re: In lieu of multiple attlists: LINK?

From: Steve Pepper <pepper@falch.no>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 21:29:38 +0100
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 19:58 21.02.97 +0100, David (knee-jerk) Durand wrote:
>At 12:43 PM +0100 2/21/97, Steve Pepper wrote:
>>Before anyone objects that the LINK feature has been jettisoned forever
>>from XML, let me point out that the situation we have here is analagous to
>>that of SHORTTAG and the use of the NET delimiter to enable self-identifying
>>EMPTY elements:
>Yes, but it's at least _arguable_ the people agree on what SHORTTAG means,
>and how it is to be interpreted.

I have never felt the need to ask the question "what does LINK mean", only
"what does it do?". As to interpretation: Isn't it patently obvious that
the example I gave should be interpreted as meaning nothing more or less
than "associate the semantics of xml-link with the xref element type"?

>                                LINK introduces a whole new syntax, and is
>widely avoided even within the SGML community (it is, of course, popular
>with some SGML users).

LINK just gives us a modular, extensible wrapper for the multiple attribute
definition lists everyone seems to want. The syntax is dead simple, especially
in the restricted form I suggested and there is free working software out
there that will handle it.

>                       No-one defended LINK before, and we already have 2
>ways to continue avoiding it, so why resurrect it now...

I was late joining this list and have spent several weeks catching up. I
wasn't aware that LINK had been proposed, discussed and rejected,
otherwise I wouldn't have "resurrected" it. Is this the case? If so, I

>We don't need any new syntax to solve the problem we have,  so we should
>not use any, especially something as controversial as LINK.

The syntax isn't new. It dates from 1986 (earlier, actually). And I don't
regard LINK as controversial. Merely little understood and much maligned.

Aside from knee-jerk reactions, what are the objections?


Steve Pepper, SGML Architect, <pepper@falch.no>
Falch Infotek a.s, Postboks 130 Kalbakken, N-0902 Oslo, Norway
http://www.falch.no/  tel://+47 2290 2733  fax://+47 2290 2599
"Whirlwind Guide": http://www.falch.no/people/pepper/sgmltool/
Received on Friday, 21 February 1997 15:32:37 UTC

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