xml-dev - Re: ANN: "media-types.dtd"

[John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>]

Murray Altheim scripsit:

> > But I cannot let this charge stand.  I did not write a document
> > and give it an IETF public id.  I wrote a document which *refers* to
> > other documents that are written or published by the IETF, using
> > "plausible" (a.k.a. "Sears catalogue") public ids for them.
> 
> This is incorrect. You did give it an IETF public id.

If "it" means my document whose systemid is
"http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/XML/media-types.dtd", I did not assign to
"it" an IETF public id or any other public id.

> All of your FPIs did
> use an "IETF" ownerid, as in this portion of your media-types.dtd:

True.  But those FPIs refer to IETF-published documents, not to documents
written or published by me.  I agree that it was inappropriate to
assign them, as you state:

> This would mislead people into believing that these were FPIs created
> by the IETF.

Just so.
 
> Recognize I'm not trying to slap you around.

Luckily for me.  :-)

> DocBook
> has used empty SYSTEM ids, string SYSTEM ids matching the DOS-like file
> extension (eg., "GIF", "PS", "TIFF"), etc.

These are of course defective URIs and as such not valid XML system ids,
but are (I suppose) valid SGML system ids.  (Technically "GIF" etc. would
be valid relative URIs, but that's hardly the intended use.)

> mostly I think because it's simply not correct to
> label things as a product of someone else.

I labeled an IETF product (publication) as being by the IETF,
using a public ID that could plausibly have been assigned by the
IETF but wasn't.

The error is similar to that of assigning an ISBN to a work
that didn't have one, using the correct prefix for the actual publisher.
Definitely not the Right Thing.

> Of course, everyone I've talked to has a different opinion on the value
> of notation identifiers.

I think there are only two opinions:  "worthless" and "pearl of great
price".

>    But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God,
>    how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye
>    desire again to be in bondage?  -- Galatians 4:9

Hmm.  And who would the "weak and beggarly elements" be in this case?

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)