- From: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:42:54 -0500 (EST)
- To: paul@arbortext.com (Paul Grosso)
- Cc: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> Whether using a TR9401 catalog and/or a MIME solution, there needs > to be some "packing" and "unpacking" process that determines what > all is needed in the package, finds and collects all the bits, and > generates the interchange package and/or catalog or expands the > interchange package back into a bunch of files appropriately placed > and named. That is, defining a packing mechanism doesn't solve the > problem if it still requires manual effort to create or process the > package. I wouldn't add such packing/unpacking requirements to XML, > so the definition of XML and the solution to interchange packaging > seem to be separable issues. I agree that it can be specified separately, I just hope it is specified. The SGML world seems to have come up with several elegant solutions to this problem of packaging entities: mime-SGML, SDIF, TR9401, etc. Whereas the "Java world" as represented by Sun just chose a solution based on readily available software (.zip with no compression) and got on with it. I would really like it if we could just choose a solution and "get on with it." I don't care if it is as simple and inelegant as "tar" (in fact, I would prefer a system that was as simple as tar). If, as you suggest, the solution is specified as a separate document, "XML-Package", then it can be replace at any future time with "XML-OLE" or "XML-Bento" or whatever else is more advanced. Paul Prescod
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 1997 12:43:07 UTC