• To: 'XML List' Developers <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XML Data Modellling/Linking
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:00:38 -0400
• In-reply-to: <87pt3av66w.fsf@n...>
• References: <20041022175034.RHZW14432.mta04-svc.ntlworld.com@Turtle> <1098471565.2527.26.camel@homer> <87pt3av66w.fsf@n...>

On Oct 22, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Norman Walsh wrote:

> | Linkbase processors could be fun!
>
> Short of using URIs, I don't know how to write a general purpose one.

I don't see URI's make them any easier either. There are a lot of 
practical problems in writing a linkbase for XML... URI's don't really 
make a difference one way or another really. In an open linkbase, the 
problems are ever larger, and URI's don't help there either.

Like most things, I think the trick is really architecting the 
interpretive infrastructure well, rather than the representation.

• References:
  • RE: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: After XQuery, are we done?)
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
  • RE: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: AfterXQuery, are we done?)
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: XML Data Modellling/Linking
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: After XQuery, are we done?
• Next by Date: Re: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: AfterXQuery, are we done?)
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Data Modellling/Linking
• Next by thread: Re: After XQuery, are we done?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread