Re: XML catalog draft
> (2) FPIs are used, and any XML application that needs to can turn
> the FPI into a system identifier and proceed. (This is what
> Paul Prescod is opposing. I _think_ he wants all resolution methods
> to be proprietary, so that we should not recommend one.)
Sorry I wasn't clear. I don't mind that there exists a non-proprietary
method as long as there is also the ability to create proprietary methods.
In fact I favour it. I think it would be good if we could agree on a
default standardized method.
But don't think that the existence of PUBLIC in the grammar should be
tied to our figuring out a resolution mechanism for them. You and I
agree that XML documents can be interchanged without a well defined
public identifier resolution mechanism (using system).
You seem to believe that leaving PUBLIC in the grammar without a
resolution mechanism will inevitably lead to interoperability, and
I don't believe that. I think that it will just lead to people using
public identifiers in prearranged systems and system identifiers on the
Web. I believe that PUBLIC is useful without a well defined resolution
mechanism, through pre-arranged conventions and systems, and you may
not believe that.
Or, to put it another way: in the days before SOCAT, would it have been
better to have no public identifier mechanism at all? I certainly used
it before there was a well defined mechanism. Author/Editor, in particular
had/has a very powerful mapping format that does many things that SOCAT