W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > October 1996

Re: A17: keep or drop entities?

From: Robert Streich <streich@slb.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 01:59:11 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0b26.32.19961009014055.006bb904@austin.sar.slb.com>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Cc: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 10:40 AM 10/8/96 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>My feelings on this have been going back and forth like a ping-pong ball.

Mine too, with respect to external text entities. Internal text entities
are a must.

I think that Bill made an excellent point. Look at all of the effort that
has already gone into the issue of entity resolution over the net. Yikes.
How to parse it pales in comparison. However, I think we need to have
some form of transclusion. Personally, I think conloc makes much better
sense (this requires CONREF by the way) for general reuse, but external
entities are easier, especially for "library" reuse.

Rehabilitating server-side includes doesn't really do the trick either
because the client needs to be aware of the transclusion in order to be
able to cache it. To tell the truth, this is the biggest reason I see to
support retaining external text entities.

With regard to notations, I side with Len. I would like to retain the
ability to restrict the notations that are valid, not open it up. MIME
types are appropriate for identifying the notation of a chunk of data
as it comes in, but I think that that is too late.


Robert Streich				streich@slb.com
Schlumberger				voice: 1 512 331 3318
Austin Research				fax:   1 512 331 3760
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 1996 03:06:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:04 UTC