[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "BackFollow", May it RIP.
- To: <bobp>, <xanatech>
- Subject: Re: "BackFollow", May it RIP.
- From: Hugh Hoover <heh>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 90 14:16:32 PST
I don't think the 'from - to' argument holds as well with the follow,
backfollow dichotomy. In the case of follow, there are definate structures
with a well specified direction that is being 'followed'. That is, the link
(regardless of which end) is being navigated directly through it's structure
to the specified material, link, to end, to bert or context path tree, to
the destination document. This is obvious to the programmer doing the link
code (at least, right ravi?). 'Backfollow', on the other hand, is navigating
from a document to another structure with no 'visible' means to do so. So,
when a link is added that
'ends' in a document, no user or programmer accessible structure is noticeably
added that can be 'followed' to the link. To me, there is a very great
difference between follow and backfollow. A much, much greater difference
than between 'from' and 'to' within a link.
This being said, backfollow isn't necessarily the right word. 'Find Links'
however, strikes me as a bit too weak, because much more than links are
found with the same underlying mechanism.