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

Re: B.1 and B.2 results

From: Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:04:30 -0400
Message-Id: <199610250404.AAA04171@nathaniel.ebt>
To: Charles@sgmlsource.com
CC: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk, U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
>>In particular, I think Tim is at least misleading to say 'the
>>smokescreen about "it's the entity not the file" is just that'.
>Actually, it's the storage object, not the entity, and it isn't a
>The parser sees *everything* in the entity, but several entities can
>be stored in a single storage object. The storage object can contain
>things that aren't in any SGML entities.
>None of this is new; FSIs are just a new formalism for something
>we've always had. See notes 1 and 2 in clause 6.1 of ISO
>8879. [295:2-8]

Thank you Charles. This is a good clarification and is the way I
understand things (the best kind of clarification is one that agrees
with your position ;-)).

I should note that a *further* reason for both FSI's and MIME-based
storage managers is that email will potentially be an important
delivery mechanism for XML. Both FSI's and MIME are perfectly suited
for this.
Received on Friday, 25 October 1996 00:06:47 UTC

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