/ Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| HTML? Perhaps users can't add it quite everywhere (I doubt it would
| work in a head or a title) but almost everywhere. The distinction
| between can and may could be important here. Authors can and do
| use A links in places the DTD
/ Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| I'm slowly being convinced that XLinks don't make sense for internal
| links; e.g. linkend. I can still see using them in place of the
| various kinds of external links though.
I'd agree entirely, except that I think the notion of
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 09:33:17AM -0800, Bob Stayton wrote:
Wild thought: would it be sufficient to keep the IDREF-based mechanism
for current linking elements (Link/XRef), maybe depreciate ULink, and
add XLink support only to elements other than Link/XRef (which
may not need XLink
At 6:35 AM -0500 11/16/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
But A links are *always* inline. This doesn't provide any practical
experience with making P elements or DIV elements or BODY
elements the starting point of links.
No, they're not, which is precisely my point. A links can and do
surround block
From: Norman Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/ Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| I'm slowly being convinced that XLinks don't make sense for internal
| links; e.g. linkend. I can still see using them in place of the
| various kinds of external links though.
I'd agree
/ Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| At 6:35 AM -0500 11/16/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
|
| But A links are *always* inline. This doesn't provide any practical
| experience with making P elements or DIV elements or BODY
| elements the starting point of links.
|
| No,
At 4:40 PM -0500 11/16/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
Can you point me to any pages that actually use this, uh, feature?
Do you want to know how widespread it is or just convince yourself
that it works?
If the former, I'd guess the most common cases are complete headings
and list items placed in A
As we consider which elements will permit simple xlinks,
we also have to keep processing expectations in mind.
DocBook is in wide use because it is a practical tool to
produce content rendered in HTML and print. We need to
understand what happens to rendering when we extend the
currently limited
Norman Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Disclaimer: I still haven't read the XLink spec.]
But what does this mean:
paraWhat about hardware xlink:type=extended
locator .../
locator .../
locator .../
arc ../
arc ../
arc ../
arc ..//hardware?/para
/ Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 12:32:19PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
| We could do it that way, but I think the implementation burden would
| be even higher. Most XML systems don't have support for AF directly, so it
| would all have to be
/ Bob Stayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| This is why I think it is not yet practical to let
| para or other higher constructs be simple xlinks. The
| current delivery mechanisms can't express that very well.
| And if it can't be expressed, I doubt it will be used much.
Yes, that's
/ Karl Eichwalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| paraPlease, use one of our ulink xlink:type=extended
| locator .../
| locator .../
| locator .../
| arc ../
| arc ../
| arc ../
| arc ../
| mirror sites/ulink./para
I don't think that would be a legal
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 06:54:46AM -0500, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 12:28:29PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
A possibility would be to define this AF so that we're on a firm
formal ground, and continue using DocBook as it is now. SGML users
would be able to get the Xlink
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 08:14:33AM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
/ Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Or did you/anyone intend to directly use Xlink-processing tools
| directly in the standard toolchain ?
I do. I plan to support the links as best I can in the stylesheets and
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 07:41:55AM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
My point is that there aren't any popular presentation
systems (at all) that reasonably handle multi-ended links in an
interoperable way. If there were, we could filter DocBook to them.
Something like that maybe could be worked on
At 5:52 AM -0500 11/15/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
Yes, that's one of the factors that motivates me as well. We'll have
enough trouble with nested inlines. (And, btw, my gut reaction is to
generate broken HTML. The browser ought to handle nested links, gosh
darn it. Oh, I know I'll get talked out of
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 02:58:45PM +0100, Jirka Kosek wrote:
Yann Dirson wrote:
2. xlink:href is, well, much less sexy than linkend, and the name
does not really reflect the semantics attached to the attribute as
much as linkend does - and my guess is that href originates from
HTML,
From: Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 02:58:45PM +0100, Jirka Kosek wrote:
Yann Dirson wrote:
2. xlink:href is, well, much less sexy than linkend, and the name
does not really reflect the semantics attached to the attribute as
much as linkend does - and my
From: Norman Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/ Bob Stayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| This is why I think it is not yet practical to let
| para or other higher constructs be simple xlinks. The
| current delivery mechanisms can't express that very well.
| And if it can't be expressed,
/ Jirka Kosek [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| xref xlink:href=#some_id_in_doc/
|
| This link can't be checked by validation, you must check it when
| processing document by stylesheet or some clever XLink processor (if
| there is any).
Well, this link won't be checked by DTD validation.
Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 05:55:22AM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
Sure, one must ajust the arcs and locators appropriately, but
if constructed properly this achieve exactly what Karl has in mind.
Yes, thanks for support :)
| Popup a list to select an
/ Bob Stayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Just for fun I tested nesting A elements:
|
| A href=fooStarting A href=bara link/A and ending/A
|
| Netscape and IE5 actually handle this up to first
| closing /A. Starting goes to foo, and a link
| goes to bar. But the first /A closes both
At 2:02 PM -0500 11/15/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
/ Jirka Kosek [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| xref xlink:href=#some_id_in_doc/
|
| This link can't be checked by validation, you must check it when
| processing document by stylesheet or some clever XLink processor (if
| there is any).
Well,
At 8:09 PM -0500 11/15/01, Norman Walsh wrote:
Adding linking *everywhere* would in many ways be a radical departure
from both historical legacy in DocBook and current practice in the
field. There are no environments that I'm aware of where users can
routinely associate links with absolutely
/ Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 11:07:10AM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
| Which inline elements do you mean here (i.e., which PE definitions)?
| Or, do you mean anything that can be found inside of para?
I mean essentially all the inlines (filename,
/ Jirka Kosek [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| I think that show=embed is used for including separate objects in
| on-line presentation. If you want to split your document into several
| files you should use entities or XInclude (with parse=xml) langauge.
Right. XLink embed embeds the
/ Jirka Kosek [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh wrote:
|
| Given a PE like this:
|
| !ENTITY % xlink-optional-simple-link
| xlink:type (simple)#IMPLIED
|
| I think that there should be #FIXED simple, so one is not forced to
| add xlink:type=simple to every
/ Jirka Kosek [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| OK. But in that case, there should be at least:
|
| xlink:type (simple|extended)#IMPLIED
I disagree. I don't want phrase to be an extended link. Ever. But it can
be a simple link, sometimes.
/ Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| I suggest to do this for elements for which DocBook already
| has a linking semantic. To anchor that semantic in the syntax.
Makes sense.
| My point was that for the instance to link to its linkbase, it must
| have an element holding
On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 02:06:07PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
/ Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Should xlink:type=extended be forbidden still ? I'm tempted to not
| block them on a general basis. If there is elements with a predefined linking
| semantic, then fixing
I think most, perhaps all, DocBook elements should be allowed to be
simple links. I can easily imagine making a para or a listitem or a
table cell a link. Certainly the various kinds of images and examples
might be links. I don't think we should restrict this to just inline
elements.
--
->
Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Linking in DocBook V5.0
docbook
-- Thread --
-- Date --
Find
Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Linking in DocBook V5.0,
Elliotte Rusty Harold
--
Chronologi
32 matches
Mail list logo
