Anyone have the proposed SGML/XML package source?

[Peter Ring]

I didn't intend to stall things; on the contrary, I hoped to avoid
maintenance and interoperability problems that would soon pop up.

Assuming that you mainly live in a DocBook-processing world and don't
need more than one version of the stylesheets, the layout should work
for you. It won't work for me.

BTW, the LSB/FHS discussion about XML hierarchy and config files isn't
exactly moving anywhere. There seems to some consensus that at least XML
Catalog files should live separately from SGML Open catalog files. Some,
notably Daniel Veillard, also insists that XML resources should live
separately from SGML resources, on the grounds that XML is no longer a
subset of SGML (e.g., namespaces and XInclude), and that a lot of XML
processing will have requirements that are very different from
'traditional' SGML processing. Basically, XML was born in the context of
the WWW, and XML is now increasingly used as a data exchange format. If
you care to form your own opinion, here [1] is one place to start
browsing the thread.

While FPIs are still the most stable way to identify XML as well as SGML
resources, URIs (in the form of URLs or URNs) will increasingly be
regarded as the 'canonical' way to identify XML resources. URLs have the
nice property that they map to a local filesystem hierarchy without any
packaging effort whatsoever; think of the local XML resources as a
cache.

[1]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/lsb-xml-sgml/2002-August/000269.html

Kind regards
Peter Ring


On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 04:19, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
<snip/> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2002-05/msg00222.html
> 
> about a grand unified system of doing things (LSB compatibility, etc.).
<snip/>