W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > November 1996

Re: FPI's in NOTATION declarations

From: Terry Allen <tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 12:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199611292007.MAA25443@ishtar.fsc.fujitsu.com>
To: dgd@cs.bu.edu, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
David Durand writes:
> I add a new suggestion, that by allowing a _list_ of URIs in the SYSTEM ID,
we can have all the advantages of PUBLIC, without the drawback of the new
syntax. (I don't know what this drawback is, but some people obviously feel
that there is one).]

I don't know what the drawback is, either, if the content of PUBLIC
is defined as something to be resolved as a URN.  However, why change
the existing SYSTEM syntax when you can presently have both (in SGML):
                                                    
<!doctype para public "-//Davenport//DTD DocBook V2.4.1//EN"
"docbook.dtd-or-some-url-pointing-to-it"
[
<!entity pcont public "-//Solipsist//ENTITIES filler//EN"
"pcont.txt-or-some-url-pointing-to-it">
]>
<para>&pcont;</para>

That allows me to write, today, references that can be resolved
either way, and will let me avoid having to retrofit all my XML
when the XML spec accepts URNs, as it will surely have to if it
is to be useful on the Internet.

Regards,
    Terry Allen    Fujitsu Software Corp.    tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
 which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
  A Davenport Group Sponsor:  http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html
Received on Friday, 29 November 1996 15:08:53 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:03:44 EDT