Mon Mar 29 19:59:16 CEST 2010

Cross-linking re-take: ".." introduces graph structure

It's a strange problem, especially since you don't really notice it
with all these urls floating around in documents.

I.e. why is something like entry://../foo/123 not a good idea?

Can we count ".." as a tree reference, or is it a graph reference?

This is used so much that you really don't think about it.

It's definitely a graph (check i.e ../plt/../plt/../ etc).  It breaks
encapsulation.  I.e. it assumes the current context is part of some
larger context.

So, the conclusion is: compiling to a structure that has ".."
references is possible (i.e. a set of html files).  But, since this is
_already_ a graph structure, it might be wise to abstract also those
kinds of links generally, and fall back on the ".." links for off-line