W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > April 1997

RE: The furore over PUBLIC

From: Ken Holman <gkholman@microstar.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 09:49:16 -0500
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=Microstar_Softwa%l=OTTA02-970401144916Z-287@otta02.microstar.com>
To: "'w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org'" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
While I could support this proposal, please bear with me while I make
some observations:

>----------
>From: 	Peter Flynn[SMTP:pflynn@curia.ucc.ie]
>Sent: 	Saturday, March 29, 1997 19:47
>To: 	w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
>Subject: 	Re: The furore over PUBLIC
>
>...
>Is it too much to propose that an identifier must be 
>
>either          SYSTEM  "url"
>or              PUBLIC "fpi" "url"


I gather from draft 961114 that the behaviour of an XML system regarding
malformed or unresolvable URLs is not specified ... so I figure it is up
to the implementation.

Production [70] allows the following to be specified in production [69]:

     SYSTEM ""

So what does a conforming XML processor do when it sees this empty
string as the ExternalID's SystemLiteral?

The way I will encode my documents in accordance with the above proposal
is to use:

     PUBLIC "-//my public id//EN" ""

Which I am willing to accept will only be resolvable by XML processors
supporting resolution ... it is my choice to encode my document this
way.

Is it really so much to ask that I be allowed to use the following
instead?

     PUBLIC "-//my public id//EN"

................. Ken

>
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 1997 10:08:37 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:04:23 EDT