Paul Rabin wrote: > At 11:36 PM 7/24/01 -0400, Jonathan Borden wrote: > > >Well assuming the attribute is "xml:include" then this is identical to > >XInclude isn't it? Seriously, what is the essential difference between this > >'experimental linking facility' and XInclude? > > Jonathan, > > Actually, the attribute is xlnlink:href. And it's a bit different from > XInclude, since there is no copying or re-parsing. >
Ok I understand that the attribute has a different name (that is one difference). I still don't understand how it functions in a different way. In specific an implementation of XInclude acts _as if_ the included document was in the including document. Copying/reparsing etc are merely implementation issues. What I mean by saying that they are equivalent is that the "Infoset" provided by both mechanisms should be the same, if not please explain how the stored XML Infoset is different. This is generally termed "transclusion" and has been long discussed (e.g. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-sgml-wg/1996Dec/0318.html) Again, as far as I know, between the current mechanisms of XInclude and XLink the various well known mechanisms of reference and inclusion/transclusion are already specified. Particularly I have no idea what it would mean to be "somewhere in between XInclude and XLink". If there has indeed been invented a new concept pertaining to hypertext theory please explain this in more detail. -Jonathan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
