RE: locating schemas via public ids

[Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>]

At 16:29 2001 02 05 +0000, Leland, David wrote:
>Hi Paul;
>
>There have been w3c links in lots of our items, and I cannot view any of
>those files.

Some W3C links are public, others aren't.  Unless you give me the
specific URL, I don't know how to help.

I will try to be more conscious of this issue in the future and 
do what I can without breaching any W3C rules.  Meanwhile, I don't
think there is anything crucial to our work that isn't publicly
available.

paul

>There was also a link to a dtd in an email (that I cannot dig up at the
>moment), but when I tried the link, I got a 404 error.
>
>Regards,
>David Leland
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Grosso [mailto:pgrosso@arbortext.com]
>Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 4:20 PM
>To: entity-resolution@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: RE: locating schemas via public ids
>
>
>I believe the only URL that is W3C member-only is that marked [A]
>which is merely a pointer to the copy of Norm's message to the 
>schema mailing list requesting a public id for the schema DTD,
>so you're not missing anything there.  Was there any other URL
>to which you didn't have access?
>
>At 13:24 2001 02 05 +0000, Leland, David wrote:
>>Hi Paul;
>>
>>Just a note as I am going back through the discussions, is that the url
>that
>>you've given that points to the w3c is not something that I can access,
>>because my employer is not a member of the w3c.  Could that information be
>>put where those of us on OERTC but not w3c menbers, could read it?
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>David Leland
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Grosso [mailto:pgrosso@arbortext.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 10:44 PM
>>To: entity-resolution@lists.oasis-open.org
>>Subject: locating schemas via public ids
>>
>>
>>At 10:51 2001 01 22 -0800, Lauren Wood wrote:
>>
>>>Issue 8:
>>>. . .
>>>
>>>Resolution: Norm will fix the system ids. Norm will request a public ID
>>>for the schema DTD and for the schema or schemas from the Schemas WG.
>>
>>Done at [A].  I note that there are some in the Schema WG that are
>>not as convinced as we that public ids are a good thing, so we may
>>need to do some missionary work here.
>>
>>>The hint for a schemaloc is currently can not be a public ID. This
>>>should go into the issues list.
>>>Action on Paul: write up the position that this committee may take.
>>
>>This appears to be recorded in our issues document [B] as
>>  Issue 13.  Public identifiers for schema locations.
>>
>>[A] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2001Jan/0219
>>[B] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/entity/issues.html
>>
>>Below is what I'm suggesting we submit to the XML Schema WG.  We'd
>>need to send it soon, so please give comments asap.  
>>
>>Also, to what extent do we need to check with the OASIS AC rep before 
>>we send this to the XML Schema WG.  And, since OASIS is a W3C member, 
>>but OASIS is an outside organization, should we be involving the XML CG 
>>in this interchange or not?
>>
>>My suggested answers:  Lauren should tell Laura what we're doing and
>>we should plan to cc her on the email we send.  We (Lauren or her
>>designate--I'm willing if designated) should inform the XML CG and 
>>cc them on the email to XML Schema.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------
>>The OASIS Entity Resolution Technical Committee (OERTC) [1] is
>>chartered to developed an entity resolution catalog format in XML
>>(XML Catalog or xmlcat).  The purpose and functionality of this 
>>catalog format is to cover that which the SGML Open/OASIS TR9401 [2] 
>>Entity Management Catalog did, but using XML instance syntax and 
>>tailored for use with XML.
>>
>>Many implementors and users have found public ids and entity
>>management catalogs to be very usefulness in practical situations
>>ranging from individual use to major production environments, and
>>there is a desire to be able to use such techniques for accessing 
>>XML resources, especially "public" resources such as published
>>DTDs and Schemas.  The OERTC has the support of several implementors,
>>and its work has received interest from the xml-dev community.
>>
>>During our work, we realized that the current Schema Structures
>>draft appears to make it impossible to provide schema-locating
>>hints using anything other than URIs.  Specifically, public
>>identifiers [3] could not be used as the spec is currently written.
>>
>>In Structures, 6.3.2 How schema definitions are located on the Web [4], 
>>it says:
>>  [xsi:schemaLocation] records the author's warrant with pairs of
>>  URI references (one for the namespace URI, and one for a hint as
>>  to the location of a schema document defining names for that
>>  namespace URI). [xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation] similarly provides
>>  a URI reference as a hint as to the location of a schema document
>>  with no targetNamespace.
>>
>>The problem is that each member of schemaLocation and the value of
>>noNamespaceSchemaLocation is required to be a URI.  Furthermore,
>>the members are undelimited and separated by spaces, and public
>>identifiers can contain spaces.
>>
>>The XML Catalog (as did TR9401 before it) would allow a user
>>to locate a resource using all the information that might be 
>>known about it (name, system id, public id), and certainly schema 
>>resources will be given public ids (several have already [5]).  But 
>>this only works if there is some way to include that information in 
>>schemaLocation.
>>
>>Therefore, the OERTC asks [6] that the XML Schema WG make allowances
>>in schemaLocation for specifying both public and system ids [7].
>>
>>paul
>>
>>[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/entity/
>>[2] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/entity/9401.html
>>[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#NT-PubidLiteral
>>[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-1-20001024/#schema-loc
>>[5] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/entity/ident.html#schema
>>[6] OASIS is a W3C member organization
>>[7] Not to presume to constrain a solution to the problem, but
>>    even something such as the following might be acceptable:
>>    Say that each member--that is currently a URI--is optionally
>>    delimited by quotes and consists of either a SystemLiteral
>>    (production 11 in XML 1.0) OR the second half of the
>>    disjunction in production 75, to wit:
>>      'PUBLIC' S PubidLiteral S SystemLiteral
>>    (which, since it contains spaces, would necessarily be quoted).
>>
>>
>>**********************************************************************
>>This electronic transmission and any files attached to it are strictly
>>confidential and intended solely for the addressee.  If you are not 
>>the intended addressee, you must not disclose, copy or take any action
>>in reliance of this transmission.  If you have received this 
>>transmission in error, please notify us by return and delete the same.
>>Further enquiries/returns can be posted to postmaster@informa.com
>>Thank you.
>>**********************************************************************
>>
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>This electronic transmission and any files attached to it are strictly
>confidential and intended solely for the addressee.  If you are not 
>the intended addressee, you must not disclose, copy or take any action
>in reliance of this transmission.  If you have received this 
>transmission in error, please notify us by return and delete the same.
>Further enquiries/returns can be posted to postmaster@informa.com
>Thank you.
>**********************************************************************
>