RE: [xtm-wg] XTM-ISS Important XLink difference in DTDs

["Michel Biezunski" <mb@infoloom.com>]

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Your family still won't know what you do.  At least they'll know where.
The resources, brainpower & breadth of opportunities at Microsoft are
unmatched. The only question is are you ready for that kind of impact?
http://click.egroups.com/1/9223/4/_/337252/_/969852287/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Kal, Philip and al.

> Philip Rutherford wrote:
>
> >
> > It seems to me that there is an important XLink difference between
> > STEP's DTD (tm.dtd) and Michel Biezunski's DTD (mb.dtd). In STEP's DTD
> > the <topic> element is the extended XLink and it contains <occurs>
> > elements which are the XLink locators. In Michel's DTD however it is the
> > <occurs> element that would be the extended XLink, and it contains
> > <locator> elements which are then the XLink locators.
> >
> > For my own application of XTMs which is in describing web site structure
> > I prefer Michel's DTD because it gives greater ability to add resource
> > meta data to each <occurs> element. The example below uses Michel's DTD
> > to describe a simple web site containing two documents: welcome.html and
> > contact.html. This DTD allows separate descriptions of the two documents
> > to be added using the XLink resource type element, as can be seen below.

Philip, sorry to disappoint you but this was due to a too quick transition
from
HyTime varlink to Xlink.
Kal, I agree with your points and I am changing the syntax accordingly.

I had no intention to invent my own version of what Xlink should do, and on
that
point I agree with Kal. I think the kind of feature you
are looking for can be handled by application, but the resulting syntax
should not
wear too much on what the rules had been to have it built, because then it
would
add much complexity on many parts of the syntax. Therefore the syntax should
be
as much as possible entirely compliant with various standards including
Xlink and
everything which adds managing power should be inserted into the
application.
If we need to standardize more, let's discuss this as a long-term issue, but
I don\t think
it's appropriate for v.1 of the XTM spec. Sorry for the confusion this might
have caused.

Please have a look -- and review --  the last version of the interchange
syntax document,
which I just sent to the egroups web site, and which contains input from
Holger Rath, Steve Newcomb and me. There are several points on which we have
to take quick decisions,
so please comment.

MIchel
==========================================
Michel Biezunski, InfoLoom, Inc.
Tel +33 1 44 59 84 29 Cell +33 6 03 99 25 29
Email: mb@infoloom.com  Web: www.infoloom.com
==========================================


To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com