Re: [xtm-wg] Syntax is a bitch :-(

[Dave Pawson <daveP@dpawson.freeserve.co.uk>]

>Elliot, in 'I told you so' mood :)



>Ah, but XPath gives us no clear form of indirection. The closest we have
>is chaining XLinks together using show=replace and activate=onLoad, but
>that's pretty weak and not really the same as HyTime indirect
>addressing.

Shit Elliot, you know no one read that stuff, it was too ivory tower
(both untrue)


>This is not an indictment of XLlink, just a fact. XLink foregoes
>indirection in the name of simplicity, rightly so, I think, because
>address indirection imposes a great deal of complexity. But, the
>implication is that XLink is essentially unsuitable for document
>authoring and management (but well suited for hyperdocument *delivery*).
>
> > Remainder noted Elliot :-) I was waiting for the solution at the end
> > of it! I was disappointed, wasn't I ;-)
>
>Were you? The solution is system implementation dependent. The solution
>can be modeled using HyTime syntax but implementing a working
>information management system that manages the syntax is a bit more
>involved :-)

NOW TAKE THAT GRIN OFF YOUR FACE!!!!

OK, I admit defeat. RTFM/wishlist
     So when will Scheme/DSSSL type architectures have their day?
Regards DaveP




-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Dial 1-800-555-TELL -- You Won't Believe Your Ears!
For more details, click here:
http://click.egroups.com/1/9537/4/_/337252/_/971284941/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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