- From: Eve L. Maler <elm@east.sun.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 14:58:57 -0500
- To: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
>Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:19:31 +1100 >From: Erik Wilde <netdret@dret.net> >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I) >X-Accept-Language: en-US,de-CH >To: Steve DeRose <Steven_DeRose@brown.edu>, "Eve L. Maler" <elm@East.Sun.COM>, > dorchard@ca.ibm.com, bent@exemplary.net, > David Lowe <dbl@eng.uts.edu.au> >Subject: more thoughts about show=embed... > >hello. > >consider the following scenario: > >- a simple xml-document (mostly text) named text.xml, containing a >number of foreign words. > >- an xml dictionary of english translations named words.xml, looking >like > ><words> > .... > <word fword="kindergarten"> > <eword>nursery</eword> > </word> > .... ></words> > >what i want to do now is create links that help me read a document >containing foreign words by replacing them with their english >translation. basically, there are two approaches to do this (with >respect to the point that i am trying to make here): > >1. one locator, using a location set of all occurrences of the foreign >words: > ><extendendlink> > <locator role="fword" >href="text.xml#xpointer(string-range(//text(),'kindergarten'))"> > <locator role="eword" >href="words.xml#xpointer(word[fword='kindergarten'])"> > <go from="fword" to="eword" actuate="onLoad" show="embed"> ></extendedlink> > >2. multiple locators, using a location set of all occurrences of the >foreign words: > ><extendendlink> > <locator role="fword" >href="text.xml#xpointer(string-range(//text(),'kindergarten')[1])"> > <locator role="fword" >href="text.xml#xpointer(string-range(//text(),'kindergarten')[2])"> > <locator role="fword" >href="text.xml#xpointer(string-range(//text(),'kindergarten')[3])"> > <locator role="fword" >href="text.xml#xpointer(string-range(//text(),'kindergarten')[4])"> > .... (as many locators as occurrences) ... > <locator role="eword" >href="words.xml#xpointer(word[fword='kindergarten'])"> > <go from="fword" to="eword" actuate="onLoad" show="embed"> ></extendedlink> > >(i am pretty sure that i have made some syntax errors in the xpointers, >but at least i think it has become clear what i wanted, the first >example using an xpointer addressing one location set containing all >occurrences of the foreign word in the document, the second example >containing individual locators vor every occurrence). > >obviously, the second approach is a bit strange and voluminous, because >it requires knowledge about the number of occurrences. but apart from >that, how would the two different links differ in functionality? differ >they at all? and if they do differ, why is that so? and is that >intended? and what is the difference? > >to get more to the point that i really would like to make: the whole >concept of show=embed in my view somehow implies the existence of a >contiguous presentation (such as a rectangular window into which the >embed has to be placed), which breaks down when location sets are being >used, or when content is not rendered as linearly as text most often is. >for example, consider a svg graphic, where some graphical structure >(scattered all over the xml document in different and non-contiguous >locations) is identified by a location set and should be replaced with >another graphical structure, using xlink. in this case, it would be >desirable to have the whole location set replaced by only one occurrence >of the embedded link target, while in case of my dictionary example, it >would be nicer to have each location in the location set replaced by the >embedded link target. things get even more complicated when thinking >about media types that do have more axes of presentation, such as smil >or other time-based xml documents. > >to conclude all this: wouldn't it be a good idea to delve a bit more >into this, into the implications of linking locations sets and the >semantics of doing this? maybe this should even be reflected at the >xlink level, such as two types of embeds, one for "embed once" and the >other for "embed all locations". ok, now i have wasted enough of your >time, and i am curious to hear what you are thinking about my example >and my thoughts about it... > >cheers, > >erik wilde - mailto:netdret@dret.net - http://dret.net/ > computer engineering and networks laboratory (tik) > swiss federal institute of technology (eth zuerich) > etz d97.4 / fon: +41-1-6325132 / fax: +41-1-6321035 -- Eve Maler Sun Microsystems elm @ east.sun.com +1 781 442 3190
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2000 14:57:37 UTC