Re: SGML objects

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Jul-Oct 1993
• Next message: Andreas Gehmeyr: "Re: icon request"
• Previous message: Dave_Raggett: "Re: SGML objects"

From: neuss@igd.fhg.de
X-Mailer-Igd: ## IGD.FHG.DE ## Thu, 19 Aug 93 12:33:03 +0200
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 93 12:31:12 +0200
Message-id: <9308191031.AA00945@wildturkey.igd.fhg.de>
To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: Re: SGML objects
Status: RO

Dear fellow Web'sters,

Dave_Raggett (dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com) wrote:
[munch]
> I can think of one approach which would work efficiently.
> Lets assume that each section is defined something like:
>        <SECTION>
>           <H> this section's header </H>
>                <SECTION>
>                    <H> a subsection header </H>
>                </SECTION>
>        </SECTION>
[munch]

Hm.. two things come to my mind here. First of all, I do agree
that having containers for sections would be a very useful thing.
If these sections were given attributes, like
        <SECTION role="Abstract">
          foo bar gronk ...
        </SECTION> 

a retrieval system would be able to handle requests like "give me 

all documents that contain the term 'compression' in the Abstract".
This would be a further step towards intergrating more text database 

functionality into the Web.

Secondly, I noticed that HTML+ defines a markup called <GROUP>,
which is intended to serve as a container for text sections. Am I
missing something, or is this basically the same as the <SECTION>
that Dave has proposed? Will group have some unique id that a
text database could refer to?

Cheers,
Chris
/*
 *  Christian Neuss  %  neuss@igd.fhg.de  %  ..in the humdrum
 */