Re: ERB Decisions of March 26th

At 16:08 26/03/97 -0500, David Durand wrote:
>At 11:48 AM -0800 3/26/97, Tim Bray wrote:
>>7a.  Should production 69 be changed to allow public identifiers?
>>So in this draft, no public IDs.  

>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.

I will support any move to establish PUBLIC ids, even to the extent of 
agreeing to require CATALOG `resolution' (provided alternatives are 
allowed at user option).