[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: B.9 Formal system, public identifiers?



At 3:21 PM 10/16/96, Charles F. Goldfarb wrote:
>The FSI design effectively treats an informal system identifier (i.e., an
>ordinary string) as a default storage object specification. The usual
>default is
>OSFILE. For XML, we could let the default be URL. In other words, for a URL you
>could enter either:
>
>http://www.exasperated.org
>
>or
>
><url>http://www.exasperated.org
>
>For other storage managers that XML supports in future versions, the normal FSI
>syntax would be used.

This is a pretty decent solution. I'd like the option to use FSI's and
FPI's since I think I can implement the few kinds I would want in _much_
less than 5000 lines of code. We can handle this like the alternate
character sets: implementations are allowed to support it, but need not.
Network publication should _not_ use FSIs or FPIs until XML 2.0 defines
exactly how they should work.

   -- David

RE delenda est.

_________________________________________
David Durand              dgd@cs.bu.edu  \  david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science        \  Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/   \  Dynamic Diagrams
--------------------------------------------\  http://dynamicDiagrams.com/
MAPA: mapping for the WWW                    \__________________________
http://www.dynamicdiagrams.com/services_map_main.html