links in XML (was "tell me more! (was Re: that would happen anyway)")

> that would happen anyway
>
> If browsers will be used to view xml documents, and if the xml:link specs are used.
>
> Bidirectional and multi-relational links, isn't that what xml:link (or xll) will bring?

Errrm... tell me more about this! I've had a look at the XML pages of the W3C, starting at their XML Activity home page,"http://www.w3.org/XML/": they do talk about XML links being able to be bidirectional and so forth (the pages I looked at were "http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xlink" and "http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xlink-principles.html" - I don't know if they're the best ones for a beginner like me to try to follow!), but they really only hint at how one would use all this for "annotating the web" a la CritSuite et al. For example, in their section on "extended links" (in "http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xlink"), they say:

> A key issue with out-of-line extended links is how
> linking application software can manage and find them,
> particularly when they are stored in completely
> separate documents from those in which their
> participating resources appear.

Well, indeed! (They do go on to say:

> XLink provides a mechanism for identifying relevant link-containing
> documents, which is discussed in "5. Extended Link Groups".

...but this mechanism seems to require "consent on both[/all] sides" to set up, if I understand it right, so it's not quite what we're looking for here.) Similarly, in "http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xlink-principles.html" they have this lovely paragraph:

> 1.9 XLink Must Be Feasible to Implement
>
> It is a nongoal for XLink to be easy to implement
> because we recognize that certain functionality,
> in particular out-of-line link handling with
> extended document groups, is inherently difficult.
> Our goal is to make implementation at least tractable;
> that is, we must consider implementability
> in our deliberations.

You said it folks! :-)

It's definitely not the case that they just haven't thought of CritSuite-style annotations: there's loads of throwaway remarks about that very possibility (or what sounds like it to me anyway!), of which this is perhaps the most clearly stated:

> Links that annotate read-only documents.
> That is, you can create links that will show up when people view a document
> even though you don't own the document. Of course, this involves a process
> of deciding whose links you do and don't want to view in this way;
> but this also makes it possible to build a valuable infrastructure of
> annotation, commentary, and communal evaluation and discussion on the Web.

(From "What is XML Linking?", at "http://www.stg.brown.edu/~sjd/xlinkintro.html", given in the "recommended reading" section of the W3C XML Activity home page.)

So... what's going on? Is there something obvious I'm not seeing, that will make the whole CritSuite style of annotation much easier once we've all switched from HTML to XML? Or is life not going to be quite that simple? As I say, tell me more!

  Iain.

--
If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing
on my shoulders.
                -- Hal Abelson

This corner of the web maintained by Iain Stewart <ids@doc.ic.ac.uk>, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, UK

- add your own comments to this web page or any other for all to see! (Only supported by some browsers, sometimes via an extension or the like.)

(If you're reading this from within IC DoC you can try Crit, an earlier way to annotate the web. )