- From: Eve L. Maler <elm@arbortext.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 16:03:40 -0500
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 10:18 AM 3/3/97 GMT, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
...
>Same old song: I have trouble with this outside the browser
>application context, although I appreciate the attempt to consider the
>broader application context which is evident in this post. Let's take
>this in pure SGML terms. Turns out REPLACE is the easiest: it's just
>super-CONREF, right? I.e.
...
>Two things to note: foo's content is gone, and so are its link-related
>attributes. Wrt the first of these, seems to me we might
>actually want to enforce the CONREF parallel, and require that at
>least in cases with ACTUATE=AUTO, the linking element must be empty,
>i.e. <foo xml-link=link show=include href="(id) baz"/>
...
>Finally NEW -- that's essentially a SUBDOC entity in an attribute.
I'm not sure it's helpful to make the connection to specific SGML
constructs; nothing dictates precisely what behavior is supposed to happen
when you use CONREF or SUBDOC. (Why couldn't SUBDOC have INCLUDE
behavior?) But you make a good point about wanting the linking element to
be empty. This would suggest a constrained AF/template/whatever for making
those kinds of links.
...
>A final point: NONE of this makes any sense for extended links, as
>far as I can see.
>
>ht
This is another really good point. If someone can make sense of these
behaviors for xlinks, great. But if we can't do that, we shouldn't offer
them as options on xlinks.
Eve
Received on Monday, 3 March 1997 16:06:54 UTC