Re: Proposed URI classes

[Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>]

At 14:45 2000 11 20 -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
>A new thread...

...with a bad subject line.

These are not URI classes.  Public identifiers include
strings that are not valid URIs.  Besides, we are not
in the business of classifying URIs.  We are identifying
useful XML contexts for external identifiers. 

>So far, I recall seeing the following classes. Is this a complete set?
>
>public
>system
>namespace
>stylesheet
>include
>
>The only others that come to mind are "import" but I think we can call
>that a type of include and "xlink" (i.e. resource URIs) but that makes
>me a little uneasy.

Anything that does not have a defined function and context in
XML 1.0+namespaces (think the Infoset) makes me uneasy for xmlcat
version 1.0, and that includes include.  (I consider the stylesheet
PI to be of the same generation as XML 1.0+namespaces, but XInclude
isn't even a CR yet, and other forms of include require application
dependent knowledge even to recognize them.)

paul