- From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:52:49 -0400
- To: W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
At 3:21 PM 10/16/96, Charles F. Goldfarb wrote: >The FSI design effectively treats an informal system identifier (i.e., an >ordinary string) as a default storage object specification. The usual >default is >OSFILE. For XML, we could let the default be URL. In other words, for a URL you >could enter either: > >http://www.exasperated.org > >or > ><url>http://www.exasperated.org > >For other storage managers that XML supports in future versions, the normal FSI >syntax would be used. This is a pretty decent solution. I'd like the option to use FSI's and FPI's since I think I can implement the few kinds I would want in _much_ less than 5000 lines of code. We can handle this like the alternate character sets: implementations are allowed to support it, but need not. Network publication should _not_ use FSIs or FPIs until XML 2.0 defines exactly how they should work. -- David RE delenda est. _________________________________________ 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 \__________________________ http://www.dynamicdiagrams.com/services_map_main.html
Received on Thursday, 17 October 1996 22:48:20 UTC