Link Evolution

From: Rod Welch (
Date: Tue Jun 12 2001 - 11:41:34 PDT


I think you raise a good question in your letter on 010416 about the purpose of
classifying links. Your idea to gain experience in order to comment is cogent
and compelling.

You might note that SDS records have a lot of links, some would say, more than
most. This would seem to provide a base of experience for someone who is
thinking about classifying links, to explain how the links might be classified,
and how much time and money this would save, relative to the time and money it
would cost to create the classification and maintain it. There are discussions
about building an "engine" to do this, but it is not clear in the record that
these proposals relate to actual experience and/or studies showing cost savings,

Alternatively, how would classifying links contribute toward solving a world
problem, like "energy" or the "environment," which have been cited as
motivations for the OHS/DKR project.


Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Murray Altheim wrote:
> > I'm thinking that we could add the types of metadata to the links
> > themselves so that wisened tools could manage the links, or work
> > with topic map engines to do this. Certainly got my head spinning
> > with ideas, anyway. If we can come up with some specifics, I'll try
> > to push these into XHTML 2.0 as much as makes sense.
> Sounds good. I personally need more time to play with typed links in a
> real system before I can make a coherent proposal. A while back, I asked
> Doug how his team used typed links in Augment. He said that,
> unfortunately, his team did not spend much time experimenting with typed
> links, but that they are one of the more interesting candidates for
> evolution.
> -Eugene
> --
> +=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== ===== ===+
> | "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so they |
> +===== can have an excuse to drink alcohol." --Steve Martin ===========+

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:58:06 PDT