XLink: behavior must go!

[Walter Underwood]

At 06:23 AM 5/12/99 -0500, Paul Prescod wrote:
>
>I believe that the XLink behavioral attributes should be removed.
>Theoretically they mix presentation and structure.

I agree that they mix presentation and structure, but I also
feel that it is worthwhile to capture some common situations.
That is, allow people to define link "roles", but start out
with a few standard roles. This is analogous to including
xml:lang in the XML spec.

I'm concerned about XML being less useful than HTML because of
a lack of common elements (conventions). For example, an XML
author has no way to reliably give a web spider a title, description,
or robot hints (follow/nofollow, index/noindex). Also, link roles 
could be meaningful to an indexing program -- transcluded text 
should be indexed with the source doc, <a>-linked text shouldn't.

I'm hunting down a copy of the PCTE rationale, since it has a
nice description of the link roles in PCTE, and how they got
to that design.

Meanwhile, maybe I should write a NOTE proposing a PI analogous
to the robots meta tag (<?robots index="yes" follow="no"?>).

wunder

--
Walter R. Underwood
wunder at infoseek.com
wunder at best.com (home)
http://software.infoseek.com/cce/ (my product)
http://www.best.com/~wunder/
1-408-543-6946

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)