[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Socat issues for XML

• From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
• To: XML Dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 11:12:46 -0400

Paul Grosso wrote:

> I have not heard a convincing argument for not including OVERRIDE
> in your subset of TR9401.  There are many TR9401 catalogs in use,
> implementing OVERRIDE is trivial, and users are used to using it.
> If you don't include it, then the existing catalogs--and users
> who write new catalogs based on their understanding of TR9401
> catalogs as they exist--will get subtlely different results with
> no warning because you would be ignoring the OVERRIDE NO entries.

*grumble*

I concede your points.  I will add support for OVERRIDE YES/NO,
with standard semantics.

> I see your point.  You want something like a PUBLIC-CATALOG entry
> type with the same semantics as the CATALOG entry type except
> additionally with the semantic "ignore if the external identifier
> has no public identifier."  Note that the referenced catalog entry
> file could still have SYSTEM (and ENTITY and other) entry types, and
> if the catalog is ever processed, all those entry types are significant,
> it's just that no catalog referenced by a PUBLIC-CATALOG entry would
> be processed if the current external identifier being resolved has
> no public id.

More accurately, it would not be processed merely because of the
PUBLIC-CATALOG entry.  If it were also referred to indirectly or
directly via a CATALOG entry, it would be processed.

> Note, you can't say "looking for" (or "not looking for") a public
> id, because you are never looking for a match to a public id per se.
> You are always looking for a match for the set of info that you have
> for the current external identifier, and that set of info includes
> one or more of (1) public id, (2) system id, (3) entity name.

Granted.  But due to implementation restrictions in SAX, I never
have an entity name available: consequently, the NOTATION and ENTITY
entries are ignored.

> I think you'd also want the standard CATALOG entry type, therefore
> PUBLIC-CATALOG would be a new entry type.  The standard CATALOG
> entry would address my "compelling example" as well as give
> compatibility with TR9401 catalogs.

Yes.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@c...
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: Socat issues for XML
    • From: Paul Grosso <paul@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Public Identifiers
• Next by Date: Re: Socat issues for XML
• Previous by thread: Re: Socat issues for XML
• Next by thread: Re: SGML char entities XML-ized? AND Re: Public Identifiers
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread