- From: John E. Simpson <simpson@polaris.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:05:52 -0500
- To: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
- Cc: xlxp-dev@fsc.fujitsu.com
I'm likely just a victim of jargon ignorance, but I believe some cleanup of the Terminology section [1.3] of the WD (especially relating to the word "arc") might be in order. The particular issue here has to do with arcs ("symbolic representation[s] of traversal semantics in links, especially the direction and context of traversal") and links ("explicit relationship[s] between two or more resources or portions of resources"). These definitions imply that the terms "arcs" and "links" are always interrelated -- that every link has one or more arcs (i.e., one or more symbolic representations of the link's traversal semantics). In a simple link, clearly everything about the link, including the characteristics of its sole arc, is defined in the local resource; the values of the from/to attributes are implicit. (Presumably "from" the local "to" the remote resource.) Things get conceptually a little mucked up in extended links, however, because the local resource (as encapsulated in the resource-type element) can *never* be the "from" end of an arc. As described in [3.1.4], the direction of an arc is defined using from and to attributes; the value of a given one of these attributes is constrained to match the value of a role attribute on at least one locator-type element in the same extended link. There's nothing at all about matching the role of a resource-type element. The problem, I think, is that there's the informal term "arc" (as used in the Terminology section [1.3]) and the more formal one (as used in e.g. "arc-type element"). The former sort of arc can reference local or remote resources; the latter, remote only. Again, I probably am just missing some elemental piece of the puzzle. But as it stands now, syntactically the term "arc" is connected only with the remote resource(s), which implies to me that the definition of the term "arc" in [1.3] should say, explicitly, "...traversal semantics in links *among remote resources*." (P.S. Yes, I'm aware of the special case in which an arc may *implicitly* include the local resource as its from/to value, as when values for the from and to attributes are not explicitly provided. This just confuses the language even further, IMO.) =================================================================== John E. Simpson | I spilled spot remover on my dog. simpson@polaris.net | He's gone now. http://www.flixml.org | (Stephen Wright)
Received on Monday, 17 January 2000 14:05:19 UTC