- From: Terry Allen <tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 10:51:31 -0800 (PST)
- To: U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
- Cc: papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Michael writes:
>Specifying a method of resolving FPIs seems to
make those guarantees; specifying FPIs without a defined method of
resolution seems to make neither guarantee. That's a level of
independence between publisher and reader which I am not prepared to
endorse.
If the defined method of resolution is "resolve as URNs", which
various systems may do variously but with the same results (unless
some succeed and some fail), does that suffice for you? There
will be many (possibly competing) methods of resolving URNs;
your system (NOT your XML system, your dealing-with-the-Internet
system) will have local preferences about how to use them; you
solve the problem there for all applications that need to handle
URNs. As a reader, I want that kind of independence; as a writer,
I want to avoid having to touch my docs after I'm finished with
them; as a publisher, I'm more or less where I am with ISBNs,
except that the resolution mechanisms are still being constructed.
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 Monday, 2 December 1996 13:52:40 UTC