Re: ERB Decisions of March 26th

On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, David Durand wrote:

> >So in this draft, no public IDs. 

> It's a shame that I will only be
using non-compliant XML documents and parsers.  

> 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 concur.  I too thought the voices of sanity had prevailed, so 
I have been quiet . All my documents and those of my clients
will also be non-compliant.  Writing small programs to take out the
minimization indicators out of DTDs and make empty elements look different 
in instances is trivial. Coming up with an entirely new 
mechanism to solve my identification/location problems is NOT.

In my opinion, Resolution is 
part of your charter.  You are not going to tell me 
what to do with a URL, that's my problem as an application.
There have been legions of PRO arguments.  The only counter
argument that stuck (or did I miss a few?) was "there is no
agreed upon mechanism."  This is true, but not necessarily useful!

-- a very disappointed Debbie Lapeyre

Follow-Ups: References: