Re: Support for XML iso entities

[Jorge Luiz Godoy Filho <godoy@conectiva.com>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2763 bytes --]

On Tue, 29 May 2001, e.bischoff@noos.fr wrote:
> Le Mardi 29 Mai 2001 01:29, Jorge Luiz Godoy Filho a écrit :
>> > Hi Jorge. I hope you are doing fine.
>>
>> Hi! I'm OK, thanks. :-))
> 
> Super! :-)

Thanks! And how about you? Too much work?

>> (...) For XML entities one uses Unicode representation, for SGML
>> not.
> 
> I know. But XML files are SGML files (the contrary is not true) and
> SGML tools can use both entity sets. I'm not sure however that it
> would mean that we can get rid of the SGML-only version of the ISO
> entities, they way they are declared could have some impact, for
> example on stylesheets.
> 
> I've simply been putting everything together because of this
> interoperability, and to avoid multiplying the number of
> packages. Don't you think we've got already enough of them? ;-)

No, I don't. As a base package for SGML processing, I think it should
be only for SGML processing. Without caring for what tool can or
cannot use it. If the specs says that we should use those entities in
some specific way, that's what we should go for. 

XML specs says that entities must be specified in Unicode. So, the
specs requires different things. Besides, I don't see any problem
having a package with only XML entities (and that package might
requires sgml-common, for the catalog installation and other tools). 

> I agree that a separate xml-common package could be a valid
> technical solution, I just don't really see a good reason why we
> should go this way.

The reason is: having fewer things, makes you worry with fewer
problems. And (I know disk is cheap) it will make our packages smaller
and more specific to a desired function. 

> Everything this package contains are very basic and small
> ressources, although a bit heterogeneous. I think that both versions
> of the ISO entities go well together in this package.

I still think that there should be an xml-common. BUT, I don't want to
push you to this decision. I just want, if it will be in the same
package, to be able to split them here and have all the tools
working. There should be no requirement os assumption on any of the
tools that I will always have both XML and SGML stuff together since
this isn't true. People get really lost with this complex system and
all this catalog and entities stuff... Having unused stuff installed
there will make them even more confused.


As I saida, this is only my opinion. If you decide not to take it,
I'll accept and keep on using the packages. :-) 


Be seeing you,
-- 
Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com>

Suporte à Rede Conectiva de Serviços -- Conectiva Services Network Support
Conectiva S.A     -    www.conectiva.com.br     -   +55 (41) 360-2600
Conectiva Inc.    -    www.conectiva.com        -   +55 (41) 360-2600