- From: Charles F. Goldfarb <Charles@SGMLsource.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:36:54 GMT
- To: gtn@ebt.com (Gavin Nicol)
- Cc: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk, U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
On Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:04:30 -0400, gtn@ebt.com (Gavin Nicol) wrote:
>>The parser sees *everything* in the entity, but several entities can
>>be stored in a single storage object. The storage object can contain
>>things that aren't in any SGML entities.
>>
>>None of this is new; FSIs are just a new formalism for something
>>we've always had. See notes 1 and 2 in clause 6.1 of ISO
>>8879. [295:2-8]
>
>Thank you Charles. This is a good clarification and is the way I
>understand things (the best kind of clarification is one that agrees
>with your position ;-)).
>
>I should note that a *further* reason for both FSI's and MIME-based
>storage managers is that email will potentially be an important
>delivery mechanism for XML. Both FSI's and MIME are perfectly suited
>for this.
Well, while I'm on a role, let me clarify things a bit further. MIME is a
storage manager. FSIs are a means of identifying storage managers in an entity
declaration. So the two work together; they are not alternatives.
(Actually, the SGML Extended Facilities list two MIME-based storage managers:
MIME is a "container" storage manager, like TAR, and is used for normal entity
declarations. MIMETYPE is used to associate notations with processing, and
occurs only in external identifiers in notation declarations.)
--
Charles F. Goldfarb * Information Management Consulting * +1(408)867-5553
13075 Paramount Drive * Saratoga CA 95070 * USA
International Standards Editor * ISO 8879 SGML * ISO/IEC 10744 HyTime
Prentice-Hall Series Editor * CFG Series on Open Information Management
--
Received on Friday, 25 October 1996 17:36:43 UTC