Re: Catalog Requirements

[Terry Allen <tallen@sonic.net>]

Paul wrote, in part:
| >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.

I don't believe I am mixing layers; I believe that the contextual
semantics (e.g., SYSTEM vs PUBLIC vs ENTITY) of the socat are obsolete 
and that the 2 mapping problems are at exactly the same layer.  But I
accept your argument that URI>URI mapping is out of scope for
this TC, so I won't press the point.  But I do have to make
some progress in understanding how to do both.

| >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),

URI work of course belongs in the IETF, but that's another matter.

| 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.

Fine, I'm just soliciting opinion.  Do you have one on the
question I raised?

regards, Terry