Re: New draft published

[Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>]

At 15:58 2001 07 09 -0400, you wrote:
>At the usual place[1]
>
>                                        Be seeing you,
>                                          norm
>
>[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/entity/


Why does it sometimes say "Table of Contents" in the middle of nowhere in
odd places?  The one after 4.1 is particularly confusing because it then
says 4.1.1 Prefer attribute but it's really not section 4.1.1, it's section
4.1 about external identifiers (and the ref to 4.1.1 is the one line toc
referring to the upcoming section 4.1.1--very confusing).

In 6.2 we refer ti "white space" without defining it.  You should make
that a link to the defn of white space in XML 1.0 which is production 3:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#NT-S

In 6.3, you say that "catalog processors must perform normalization on URI 
reference in both the catalog and the input passed to them."  First,
"URI reference" -> "URI references".  Next, I think that's wrong as far
as "URI reference in...the catalog".  Since you are talking about matching,
you must be talking about the lhs, but neither the system nor the URI
entry type has a URI reference on the lhs.  Per 6.5.4 and 6.5.8, both 
lhs's are things of type "string".  The rhs of both is of type URI ref,
but it doesn't make sense to talk of normalizing it.  So this para seems
to need rewording.

Next para, "URI reference require" has subject-verb agreement problems.

In 6.4, '(that is, URN that begin "urn:publicid:")' has subject-verb agreement 
problems.

In 6.5.3, I see "The URI reference should not include a fragment identifier."
I think I keep objecting to this, and maybe I keep getting an answer why I'm
wrong, but I have to be reminded one more time, I guess.  Why this restriction?

In 6.5.4 and 6.5.5 it talks about matching the normalized value of a sysid.
Again, I think I'm forgetting something, but this still doesn't make sense
to me, esp. since the bit in 6.3 about normalizing made no sense to me.  Why
are we normalizing sysids before matching?  Seems bogus to me.  I have the
feeling I'm forgetting an entire discussion we've had, but it's clear it didn't
convince me yet.  Likewise in 6.5.7 thru 6.5.10.  I can't make sense of any of
this until 6.3 makes sense, and I can't make that make sense to me.

paul