🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1jarh4INNqvd@nigel.msen.com> Edward Vielmetti writes:
>Dan Connolly (connolly@convex.com) wrote:
>
>: I'm really curious about whether the WAIS, Gopher, WWW, etc.
>: gang could use HyTime to build interoperable architectures for the
>: growing distributed hypermedia infobase on the internet.
>
>HyTime is complicated (nay, obtuse).  Gopher at least is quite simple.
>I doubt that you are going to get the gopher gang to commit to anything
>that you can't write a server for in an afternoon's hacking in Perl.
>
>  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
>        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB
>

HyTime, taken in total, is, unquestionably, complex, but the base
hyperlinking constructs defined by HyTime are remarkably simple
and can be no more complex than any existing IDREF element in
your favorite DTD.  There is really no excuse for any SGML-based
hyperthinging not being at least minimally conforming with HyTime.
It's just not that hard.  And just because you declare a document
type such that it is HyTime conforming, that doesn't mean your
processor has to be a HyTime engine.

I think the main problem with HyTime is that the simple gets lost
in the details, but the simple is there.  My suggestion for anyone
trying to understand HyTime is to ignore everything except the
location and base hyperlink elements until you feel you understand
those, and then move on to schedules and coordinate spaces.  Take
your favorite DTD and figure out how to modify the declarations of
your hyperlink elements to they conform.  Don't try to absorb it all
at once.

Eliot Kimber                      Internet:  drmacro@ralvm13.vnet.ibm.com
Dept E14/B500                     IBMMAIL:   USIB2DK9@IBMMAIL
Network Programs Information Development     Phone: 1-919-543-7091
IBM Corporation
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709