[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: naming catalogs
On today's phone call, I promised to write something about why I think it's a good idea to have a default catalog name. Here goes - feel free to shoot holes. The catalog resolver should, as a fallback when no other catalog is defined, look for a file named "xcatalog" (I don't really care about the name) in an implementation-defined directory (for example, with the document, in a directory where DTDs are commonly found, or some other choice). In circumstances where files were sent using MIME, the xcatalog would be expected to be one of the files. Why is this good? Basically, it provides a fallback for the case when the system designer hasn't specified where a starting catalog is to be found and the user doesn't know enough to figure out how to set one up themselves. The document PI that we have incorporated is a help when the author has added it, but not if not. Each implementation can define a starting catalog file for itself; it seems to me that interoperability is helped if there is a defined fallback name for this. People tend to use fallback names as a starting point a lot, even if the implementation allows other names, so I think the tendency would be for many system designers and authors to use a file named "xcatalog" and send it along in email, where other systems would easily be able to use the file, rather than having the receiver have to figure out which of the sent files was the starting catalog file, and then rename it to match whatever their system uses (once they've figured that out). We want to make it easy to use catalogs; I think having a default name helps with this and I can't see the downside to it. Lauren
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC