[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xml catalogs



On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:17:02PM -0400, Mark Johnson wrote:
> On , April 9, David N. Welton wrote:
> > 
> > libxml2 makes use of /etc/xml/catalog, which evidently doesn't exist
> > in Debian.  Any ideas of how to go about setting it up in order to
> > use it with:
> > 
> > <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.1.2//EN"
> >   "http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/docbook/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd";>
> > 
> > Any ideas?
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> Yes, this is a recognized problem. It's also part of the larger problem of
> implementing XML Catalogs in general. I'm not sure what level of support libxml2
> provides for the old style SGML catalogs (aka OASIS TR9401:1997). (Daniel??)

  Basically it implements the subset implemented by James Clark in Jade.
For example DTDDECL is not supported.

> However, you should be able to get away with using the SGML catalog system by
> using the '--catalog' option to xsltproc. I.e.
> 
>   xsltproc --catalog file:///etc/sgml/catalog stylesheet file

  Hum, I don't remember this option. At least using SGML_CATALOG_FILES
environment variable should work. But really the intent is to phase out
SGML catalog, their startup time and maintainance is really too high.

> In fact, I've been meaning to get to work on this, but have been busy trying to
> resurrect the work on XML/SGML component of the LSB spec.

  Yep, that's the place where this should be "fixed" then the distros will
follow. Note taht the latest Mandrake builds the XML catalogs when installing
resources and that the packages in Red Hat latest beta do the same.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard@redhat.com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sgml-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: