RE: Namespace related-resource bundles: just the one?

[Miles Sabin <MSabin@interx.com>]

Uche Ogbuji wrote,
> I prefer the PI approach to this because it allows one to 
> codify and distribute namespace catalog alternatives without 
> needing to distribute code, and in a more transparent way.  I 
> thinkk, however, there is plenty of room for both approaches.

It's just struck me that using a PI in this way is really quite
odd in the context of wanting to use namespace URIs for catalog
retrieval.

Let's suppose that we quite often want to do catalog redirection.
In that case our docs will often look like this,

  <?xml version="1.0"?> 

  <?namepace-resolution-redirect
    from="http://spam.com" to="nscat.xhtml"?>

  <foo xmlns="http://spam.com">
    <!-- namespace URI not used for retrieval because of
         preceeding redirect -->
    <bar/>
  </foo>
  
But then it's very hard to see how that's better than,

  <?xml version="1.0"?> 

  <?catalog-uri href="nscat.xhtml"?>

  <foo xmlns="http://spam.com">
    <!-- namespace URI *never* used for retrieval -->
    <bar/>
  </foo>

In other words, the more useful (and used) a catalog redirect
PI is, the less point there would be in dereferencing the 
namespace URI.

Cheers,


Miles

-- 
Miles Sabin                               InterX
Internet Systems Architect                5/6 Glenthorne Mews
+44 (0)20 8817 4030                       London, W6 0LJ, England
msabin@interx.com                         http://www.interx.com/