- From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:29:03 -0500
- To: "'w3c-sgml'" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
I was going to reply in detail to Ken Holman's note, and the note from Lee that inspired it, and Ron Daniels' notes that have started this thread, but instead I think I should summarize, rather than doing a blow-by-blow. Ron has laid out some strategies for FPI resolution. Note that URNs will have _at least_ several alternative resolution mechnisms (probably including some kind of local filesystem access). Ron is asking about appropriate mechnisms for resolving FPIs within the URN framework. This is great: certainly some variation of catalogs should be useful in the FPI subset of the URN space. Note that URNs (of any sort) do not inherently require the use of DNS or any particular machines, though NAPTR defines a resolution mechanism based on DNS. Eventually, for some documents, I expect that libraries will get into the act, or some groups filling the social function of library catalogs if they don't fill that niche. I think, given that the URN group is willing to figure out how to integrate FPI into URN resolution, that we should encourage and help them on that (but not worry about specifying or discussing those mechanisms here, as it's not the right place). The XML standard should specify the option to have a PUBLIC string, expain that it is unique, persistent, etc., and how to get a GCA or ISBN publisher prefix. It should point out that resolution is application dependent, but that applications are suggested to use catalogs (We might make a simplified catalog format the does not bother with remapping SYSTEM, network resolution, etc, if that makes for 1000's of lines of code), or the Internet's URN mechanisms for FPIs (this latter is being worked by the URN group, and need not be further specified). We also need to note that other resolution mechanisms are also acceptable. That gives an implementor two things to implement if they desire, and a browser (or other simple parser) can simply use system IDs, and treat the FPI as documentation when reporting the failure, if it does not ignore the FPI completely. FPIs can _only_, in principle, guarantee that something has a unique name, not that you can find the thing. (But, of course, having a unique name can be of use in finding things). -- David I am not a number. I am an undefined character. _________________________________________ David Durand dgd@cs.bu.edu \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams --------------------------------------------\ http://dynamicDiagrams.com/ MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________
Received on Thursday, 5 December 1996 10:23:32 UTC