Perhaps I am still missing something in my understanding about
transclusion.
I believe in these Principles:
(1) Any author should be allowed to withdraw or edit any part of his
text at any time.
(2) No author should be able to alter another's original text, but
should be allowed to excerpt, quote and highlight passages.
Given these two principles, what if Author A modifies his text after
Author B writes a criticism of it in which he transcludes part of the
original text?
What if Author A's modification deletes or modifies the portion of the
text which Author B's document criticizes? This renders the review
obsolete (and perhaps moot). With Transclusion, presumably Author B
would be informed of Author A's modifications, and have the option of
revising his review. If the changes by Author A substantially alter the
content of the document (e.g. deleting a paragraph which Author B found
offensive) then the updates to Author B's document cannot be done
automatically, because they necessitate Author B's human consideration
of the changed meaning. What happens if Author B is on vacation?
[Jay Osako] My understanding is that document b still points to
document a, which (under Xanadu) is still available. if author B wants to
comment on the modified document a', then he'd write the new
commentary c (possibly linking it to b to make b') and link it to a'.
It is possible, however, to link to a second link instead of a document
directly however. If the 'handle' (I thnk there is a special term for this,
but I can't recall it) points to the link 'section a@ of current version of a',
then the newest version is included instead of the one current when it
was made. On the user's end, they'd select something like 'hot link'
or 'update automatically' when making the link, and that would be it.
Is this more or less correct by the current desing, or am I wrong?
Jay<<application/ms-tnef>>