> Is it necessary to include all the SDA attributes
> in the base DTD? I thought that <!LINK was the
> recommended approach for enabling SDA.
At the current time, few parsers support link (and James Clark's new SP
parser, supports LINK, just came out). The tools that most people have/use
today require the SDA attrs in order to write a generic transformer vs custom
code for each DTD or change. If most of the info's available in the DTD, more
people can make use of it. I agree with you that LINK will be what we use in
the future ... but for now ...
> the DTD is *the* definitive reference it's advantageous to
> keep it as simple as possible
Another perspective is that it gives adaptive access a hard to ignore presense.
I hope that many people will see just how easy SGML can enable all kinds of
info reuse including ICADD.
> These aren't serious objections; I was just wondering.
They're good points. I too look forward to writing LPDs.
P.S. joe@trystero ?!? W.A.S.T.E. not want not ?!?
Jeff Suttor
JSuttor@Library.UCLA.Edu
Voice: +1 310 206 5565 Fax: +1 310 206 4109
<URL http://WWW.Library.UCLA.Edu/~jsuttor/jsuttor.html>
Member of IETF HTML-WG (http://www.hal.com/%7Econnolly/html-spec/)
Member of SGML Open (http://www.sgmlopen.org)
Davenport Group Groupie (http://www.ora.com/davenport/README.html)