- From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:46:56 +0000
- To: lee@sq.com, w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
At 18:33 18/1/97 EST, lee@sq.com wrote: >Unless you want to keep a list of several hundred possible schemes >and how they break down, with differing attribute sets, I would >say that it is a bad idea to try this. I would like a generalized mechanism that will allow users to break the addresses into any set they find useful to manage, and specify the order they should be reconstructed in. Eliot has suggested that this should be done via Notations, but this would not work for URLs. Perhaps XML should hard-wire the URL example as it would be the most common one. >Yes, people like the HoTMetaL approach -- but that isn't standardised; >we have to update the code every now and again, too, to cope with new >kinds of URL. > >Leave opaque strings as opaque. Then XML will offer existing HTML users no better mechanism for link management than their already non-existent facilities. Why on earth should they change? ---- Martin Bryan, The SGML Centre, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029 WWW home page: http://www.u-net.com/~sgml/
Received on Sunday, 19 January 1997 03:49:07 UTC