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

Re: Relationship Taxonomy Questions

From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:48:48 -0500
Message-Id: <v0213050aaf0d61a78a2b@[]>
To: Terry Allen <tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com>, eliot@isogen.com, papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Cc: w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
At 8:26 AM 1/23/97, Terry Allen wrote:
>What you were saying is that you want to specify a set of relationship
>labels.  I think the taxomony of relationships is orthogonal to the
>mechanism for using them, and competition among different taxonomies
>should be encouraged, hence XML itself should not specify a

Finally Terry has said something sensible on this topic. (Since Terry
usually is sensible, this is less a surprise than the argument about link

Defining link types is as hard as defining a universal DTD. A lot of danger
there. I'd rather stay out of it. didn't Murray Maloney's list get up to 40
types or more? I think Randy Trigg's thesis had 150 or so, but I don't have
it available to check.

On the other hand, a non-binding annex of useful names for common links
might actually help people to understand (and thus use) link types.

>You have not given a single example of a label you want to specify.
>Please do so.

I'm thinking something like maybe:
   quote-external work

That list may already be too long, but as a list of suggestions it might be
useful, and not as perniciously processing oriented as Len's "gosub".

  -- 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 Thursday, 23 January 1997 13:47:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:06 UTC