[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: XLink: behavior must go!
Subject: Re: XLink: behavior must go! From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 09:13:31 -0400 |
Martin Bryan wrote: >Paul Prescod wrote: > >>I believe that the XLink behavioral attributes should be removed. >Theoretically they mix presentation and structure. This causes all kinds >of practical problems addressed below: > >Behaviour *must* stay. What we need is some mechanism for passing through >behaviour control properties from the instance to the XSLT. The behaviour >attribute provides us with a standardized point which we can query from >within XSLT to determine which types of behaviour a particular instance of >an object should have. In fact the behaviour attribute should move from the >XLink to XML standard, as xml:behaviour-control, but that is is bit too >radical for people to bite off just yet. In the meantime it is vital that at >least XLink provides us with a standardized mechanism for controlling >instance behaviour. (Paul is right to say this is really a "hints" >thing -but it is something more than a hint - it is a set of parameters that >can be used to control behaviour where appropriate.) > Is there anything within XLink itself that cannot be replaced by XSLT now that doc() and docref() have been defined? Does XLink not become something akin to a standard set of XSLT templates used for handling URI traversal? doc() and docref(), as well as unification with XPointer turn XSLT into a generalized graph transformation language. Could the XLink spec itself become an XSLT include file? Jonathan Borden http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
XLink: behavior must go!, Martin Bryan | Thread | Re: XLink: behavior must go!, Simon St.Laurent |
RE: Architectural forms processing , Ed Nixon | Date | Re: [Fwd: Re: Language is not marku, Chris Maden |
Month |