Re: question about placements in /usr/share/xml
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 06:07:40PM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> Mark Johnson (mark@dulug.duke.edu) wrote:
> > Quoting Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo@debian.org>:
> > >
> > > Why do you have SGML catalogs under /usr/share/xml? I would expect them to
> > > be under /usr/share/sgml (together with the symlinks).
> >
> > I don't agree. Nor do I see how you could put catalogs "together with the
> > symlinks".
> >
> > The catalogs (SGML or XML) should reside in with the package files. Think about
> > it for awhile - it makes sense. Put another way: why would the SGML catalogs
> > (for an xml resource) go any place _but_ the package installation directory(s)?
> >
> > An SGML catalog is not an SGML resource (e.g. dtd, stylesheet), so why would it
> > go into /usr/share/sgml?
> >
> > I really don't get your point here, which is odd, since you're usually right.
> > Score:)
>
> The SGML catalog systen only lives in /etc/sgml and /usr/share/sgml, _not_ under
> /usr/share/xml.
I disagree. The SGML catalog system lives
in /etc/sgml and the local package directories, wherever
they may reside. Otherwise we'd have to separate trees just so the
SGML catalog can go under /usr/share/sgml. Seems unnecessary and
complicated.
> So, the root SGML catalog file only knows about package
> SGML catalog files that live in /etc/sgml which on their turn only
> know about local SGML catalogs living under /usr/share/sgml.
I, again, don't understand the need to put SGML catalogs under
/usr/share/sgml. There's nothing inconsistent about doing it this way.
> Local SGML catalog files should be installed
> in the directories where the entities have been symlinked into
> under/usr/share/sgml.
>
> Example:
>
> /usr/share/xml/foo/catalog.xml
> /foo.dtd
>
> /usr/share/sgml/foo/catalog
> /foo.dtd <== symlink to /usr/share/xml/foo/foo.dtd
This would get very hairy very quickly. The intent is to symlink
former install directories in /usr/share/sgml to the new install directory
in /usr/share/xml. Symlinkling all the files associated with a given DTD
would create some major packaging overhead. Way complicated.
>
> So, the package foo installs the local XML catalog together with the foo.dtd in
> /usr/share/xml/foo, and installs the local SGML catalog file together with the
> symlink to /usr/share/xml/foo/foo.dtd in /usr/share/sgml/dtd.
Recall that the symlinks in /usr/share/sgml are really a
transitional policy issue, so nothing breaks during the migration to
/usr/share/xml. What you're proposing is an altogether different beast.
And would be a major PITA to maintain.
> Why would the local SGML catalog file be installed under /usr/share/xml?
> It has no business there.
I don't follow your argument at all. What's the problem with an
SGML catalog in /usr/share/xml? An SGML catalog certainly isn't SGML,
so I don't see why it's imperative that it must go under /usr/share/sgml.
> Its business is under /usr/share/sgml, so that's where it is
> to be installed.
There's no way that I'll ever agree with what you're proposing. Someone
else needs to weigh in, so we can get some sort of consensus.
My $0.02,
Mark
--
_____________________________________
Mark Johnson <mrj@ibiblio.org>
Debian XML/SGML <mrj@debian.org>
Home Page: <http://dulug.duke.edu/~mark/>
GPG fp: DBEA FA3C C46A 70B5 F120 568B 89D5 4F61 C07D E242
Reply to: