Re: Xlink semantics

Peter Murray-Rust (peter@ursus.demon.co.uk)
Thu, 14 May 1998 08:09:52


At 14:20 14/05/98 +0900, Masatomo Goto wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>I'm now working on design and implementation of a XLink facility.
>My approach is to provide the XLink facility as an engine.

This is wonderful! From time to time I have suggested such an engine on
XML-DEV and it is great to see someone as well advanced as this. Do you
plan to make this available? If not, are you able to publish the semantics?

[... examples and replies snipped ...]

This was very helpful. From your replies, you appear to attach some meaning
to all except the last (which I think we would all agree was a semantic
error). I'd be very interested to know if other Xlink specialists
(including the authors?) take the same view as you.

>If the XLink processing facilities are separated from the application,
>It is possible to throw some errors from the "XLink processor".

I agree with this strategy. I have been campaigning for an XLink processor :-)

>
>> This is an important occasion that there is a clear requirement for
>> applications to apply semantics to parts of one of the specs. We already
>> have to write an attribute processor and I'm interested in knowing how much
>> additional processing any conforming Xlink software is going to have to do.
>
>FYI, I will give a speach and demonstration about my XLink engine in
>the HyTime at work session of SGML/XML Europe '98.

I have recently met a good fairy which means that I shall be at XML98 for
part of the time (probably Tuesday - Thursday). It would be nice to meet.

P.
>
Peter Murray-Rust, Director Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, domestic
net connection
VSMS http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/vsms, Virtual Hyperglossary
http://www.venus.co.uk/vhg