Re: ERB Decisions of March 26th
At 11:48 AM -0800 3/26/97, Tim Bray wrote:
>7a. Should production 69 be changed to allow public identifiers?
>No issue since DSD's has caused the ERB so much trouble. The vote
>went as follows:
> Yes, allow PUBLIC: Kimber, DeRose, Sperberg-McQueen, Maler, Hollander
> No, no PUBLIC ID: Paoli, Sharpe, Magliery, Clark, Bray, Bosak
>So in this draft, no public IDs. It should be voted that *every person*
>on the No side would change their vote to Yes if there was an agreed-on
>resolution mechanism for PUBLIC identifiers.
It's a shame that I will only be using non-compliant XML documents and
parsers. I think it's also a shame that we now have _No_ naming mechanism
in XML, since URNs when they exist will be illegal for conforming parsers
(unless you silently passed over a vote to change URL to URI in the
definition of SYSTEM IDs.
It's even sadder since we already have one implementation of the CATALOG
mechanism in place, and those who want to use PUBLIC do _NOT_ want any
mechanism to be required.
I had stopped talking on this issue, because I felt like a broken record,
and I want to finish my thesis, and I thought that the case for at least
allowing PUBLIC had been made very clear.
I hope we will have another round on this issue, despite theweariness ans
nausea that the very thought inspire, because this decision is really
misguided and harmful.
David Durand email@example.com \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams
MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________