- From: Christopher R. Maden <crm@ebt.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 15:14:55 GMT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
I like this idea! Here, load this in your XML client: -=- crash.xml -=- <?XML version="1.0"?> <mydoc> <crash xml-show="new" xml-actuate="auto" xml-target="crash.xml"/> </mydoc> -=- end -=- Wasn't that fun? I have a real problem with this level of behavioral specification. I understand Len's desire for behavioral buckets, but I think there's a better way to do that. By way of reference, and not as a plug, let me talk about DynaText. In DynaText, the SGML may express relationships between elements, but no inherent behavior is generated. The DynaText stylesheet associates behavior with elements; a function language (including queries) with element addresses allows specification of target elements for hyperlinks. For instance, in a DynaText book of the XML language spec, the WFCs, VCs, and terms are all links to their definitions. I chose, in the stylesheet, to present the semantic relationship as a new-window hyperlink. I believe that redirects should be left to HTTP. For other links, the *relationship* should certainly be asserted in the XML source, but the *presentation* of that relationship should be left to the stylesheet. To again use DynaText as an example, it is a very common practice to provide alternate views of a book, one with tables and figures in-line, and another with the tables and figures represented as icons that are links to a new window containing the table or figure. With the current XML-link proposal, this would apparently require two copies of the source, or a stylesheet override of the source. If the stylesheet can override the source, why put the information in the source at all? For browsing, a stylesheet will be necessary anyway. Asserting links and establishing relationships, yes. Specifying behavior, no. -Chris -- Christopher R. Maden One Richmond Square DynaText SIT Technical Support Providence, RI 02906 USA Inso Corporation +1.401.421.9550 (voice) Electronic Publishing Solutions +1.401.521.2030 (facsimile)
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 1997 10:28:48 UTC