- From: Rivers-Moore, Daniel <daniel.rivers-moore@rivcom.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:32:54 +0100
- To: "XML Working Group (E-mail)" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
<eliotkimber> But note that system IDs, being system-specific, are not reliable. </eliotkimber> <danconnolly> In this whole web/SGML excercise, I regard the web as an SGML system (with entity resolution equivalent to URL resoltion). So as long as the universe of discourse is the web, URLs as system IDs are reliable. XML is intended to be interoperable with systems that exceed the confines of the web, and public identifiers can facilitate that interoperability. (They can provide redundancy within the web as well.) But if the web is your only target, URLs are all you need. </danconnolly> Strange. I seem to remember I once clicked on a hotspot on an HTML page and found that the link was broken! Or was I dreaming? The issue seems to me to be one if _ownership_and_accountability_. It may be possible to consider the web as a single system. But it sure does not have a single owner. If my system ID is a URL, then it is only as reliable as my confidence that the owner of the file to which the URL points will not move it without informing me and giving me a chance to modify the system ID (URL) in all my document instances. The point about public identifiers is that they provide 1) redundancy - i.e. a fallback if the URL fails 2) accountability - the syntax of public identifiers is linked to a registration procedure and places responsibility on the content owner to follow certain rules 3) a universe higher than that of the machine to resolve the reference. When the ERB was debating whether to add PUBLIC to the XML-LANG syntax, the stumbling block was the difficulty of providing a reliable standard procedure to resolve the references. I would argue that it is precisely _because_ public identifiers cannot be fully resolved by the system that they are so important. Any identifier that can be fully resolved by the system will only be as reliable as the system. When the system breaks, we need (a) to know it has broken and (b) to be able to resolve the problem outside the system. This means there must be redundancy _and_ recourse to something beyond the system. This is precisely what PUBLIC provides.
Received on Thursday, 12 June 1997 04:31:57 UTC