[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Catalog requirements
/ John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> was heard to say: | Norman Walsh wrote: | | > In catalog parlance this is the SYSTEM keyword. You don't want to | > support SYSTEM? I do, I want | > | > <!DOCTYPE book | > SYSTEM "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd"> | > | > to resolve to /share/doctypes/docbook/xml/docbookx.dtd on my system. | | And what I want, by *not* supporting SYSTEM, is to force people who publish | DTDs to assign them public identifiers. Which involves fixing the | FPI infrastructure. Which is what I really care about. That's very noble, and I offer my wholehearted support. But I also think we need to be practical. | In addition, there is a technical difficulty with SYSTEM vs. base URIs: | what is the base URI of a document fetched through a catalog redirection? | If it is the resultant URI (which is what happens with HTTP redirection), | then any parts of the document addressed with relative URIs must be mapped | as well, with resulting mess. It's not a mess, it's exactly what any sensible person expects ;-). You copy all of DocBook to /your/favorite/place, You map "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd" to /your/favorite/place/docbookx.dtd Subsequent requests for "dbnotn.mod", for example, in docbookx.dtd get resolved to /your/favorite/place/ because that's the base URI | If it is the original URI, there are equal | and opposite problems. Yep. I see that. | BTW, in Socats which is done first, SYSTEM mapping or PUBLIC mapping? | I had thought that SYSTEM mapping could be applied to the output of | PUBLIC mapping, but I am very likely confused.... No, you can never chain them. Whether or not system comes first depends on the setting of OVERRIDE. | > Consider this instance: | > | > <?xml version='1.0'?> | > <doc xmlns="http://example.com/xmlns/namespace"> | > <para/> | > </doc> | > | > If I hand that to a processor, it might want to validate the document. | > In order to do that, it's going to have to know what schema is | > associated with that namespace. Shouldn't we provide some mechanism | > for addressing this problem? | | So this is a sort of client-side CONNEG? CONNEG? | > The real problem, alas, is that Namespaces[1] says you can't do | > anything with that namespace name except literal comparison. | | Not exactly, just that Namespaces as such doesn't prescribe anything. | RDF Schemas, for example, prescribes that you put an RDF Schema there. Hmph. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman.Walsh@East.Sun.COM | 'I have done that,' says my memory. 'I XML Technology Center | cannot have done that'--says my pride, and Sun Microsystems, Inc. | remains adamant. At last--memory | yields.--Nietzsche
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC