[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Catalog Requirements
At 14:03 2000 11 16 -0800, Terry Allen wrote: >Paul wrote: >| Furthermore, I would elaborate on what I'd call the function vrs syntax >| issue. That is, all of PUBLIC, SYSTEM, and other catalog entry types >| are functional. That is, in each case, the lefthand side is a string >| in context. For example, "xxx" could be a public id, a system id, an >| entity name, etc., but what "xxx" represents is clear from looking at >| the catalog entry in which it appears. >| >| Once you start to have a URI entry type, you are allowing something >| whose function is unclear to be mapped. When you call an entity >| resolver, you come in with an external entity declaration and you >| know that you've got X for the entity name, Y for the public id, >| and Z for the system id, and TR9401 carefully defines how to do >| the catalog lookup. > >Just to clarify, what Paul is calling "function" is "function in >XML"; URNs have the function of naming and URLs have the function >of locating. Of course. We are talking of an entity management catalog, so when I say "function," I'm referring to the function in terms of XML external entities. UR*s have no function in terms of XML external entities--their function/semantics are at a different "layer" of things. >| But URI is orthogonal to PUBLIC, SYSTEM, etc., and it going to be >| a mess. I don't want to go there. > >Okay. We do need URI>URI mapping, though. Let's imagine it >happens through (some piece of some processor) consulting another >map. (If anyone wants references to previous URN-WG work on >such maps, let me know.) Careful that you don't mix layers. Without getting into the discussion of whether URI>URI mapping is good or bad, it is not part of XML entity management and does not belong mixed in with an entity management catalog. >What piece of what processor would we like it to be, and should >the mapping be done before or after the xmlcat is consulted, >or both? and should the two items (URI map and xmlcat) be >consulted by the XML processor or by some new, specialized >processor that feeds its results into the XML processor? > >or something else? I believe this is seriously out of scope for this TC. Talk to Norm about the W3C URI IG he is chairing (fool that he is), but URI>URI mapping (as interesting a topic as it is) is orthogonal to entity management as defined by TR9401 and the charter of this TC. paul
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC