RE: two failings of XLink

Hi Tim,

Tim said:
So, as to the arcs, XLink doesn't require any of that stuff, and the 
embedding language can add as much semantics as it wants.  The 
relationship to the img is pretty obvious isn't it?  Yes, I suppose 
that adding the arcs could make it more explicit, but does anyone 
really care what order (in this case) you go from point to point?  I 
imagine that an XHTML2 processor, on mouse-over, would float up a menu 
allowing you to choose longdesc resources.

Didier replies:
Even more, we can have the <a> element expressed as follow:

The default version (as defined in the DTD)
<a xlink:href=".URI.">some text here</a>

This default version could be overloaded with the following version:

<a xlink:type="extended">
<resource xlink:type="locator" lan="JP" xlink:href=".uri."/>
<resource xlink:type="locator" lang="EN" xlink:href=".uri." />
<resource xlink:type="locator" lang="FR" xlink:href=".uri." />
</a>

Even more, if this time I want to transform it into a smart link then:

<a xlink:type="extended">
<resource xlink:type="locator" lan="JP" xlink:href=".uri.">
<description>this text has been translated in japanese</description>
<translatedBy>Ushi</translatedBy>
... some other elements giving more meta information about the
link......
</resource>
<resource xlink:type="locator" lang="EN" xlink:href=".uri." />
<resource xlink:type="locator" lang="FR" xlink:href=".uri." />
</a>

However, it seems that Micha says that the xlinks extended do need the
arc defined. This issue is not clear to me since I interpreted the specs
differently and thought that the arc definition is mandatory. If yes,
maybe a minor modification can be brought to the xlink specs to remove
this constraint.
 
Cheers
Didier PH Martin

Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 17:35:48 UTC