Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Eric van der Vlist [mailto:vdv@d...] > Sent: 16 January 2001 14:09 > To: xml-dev > Subject: Re: How could RDDL be distributed ? [...] > However, probably still missing something, I wonder of xmlcat documents > are attached to instance documents. xmlcat documents (Catalogs) aren't associated directly with instance documents, except via the Pub/SysId. It might be worth adding an additional lookup method so that even without a DOCTYPE, a NS-URI can be used to examine an xmlcat. > Also wouldn't we be multiplying the layers by using both and wouldn't it > be better to integrate xmlcat features or vocabulary within RDDL for > RDDL own purposes ? Well you could argue this the other way and say because Catalogs are well-known, and there's also an Oasis committee working on updating them, that its RDDL thats adding a layer! I think that the two layers are distinct. xmcat is a location mechanism, and RDDL is the means to define a directory of resources. They both have clearly defined roles in my opinion. IIRC there was some resistance to conflating the two layers early on the RDDL discussions. > Also, I think it would be nice to get the 3 options to define the > association between the instance document and the RDDL (through the > tools, through the instance documents and through the RDDL). I'm not sure adding stuff into the instance document is really necessary. You already have the NS-URI - what else do you really need? Even with schemas the instance document details are merely 'hints'. Cheers, L.
|
