On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 06:40:47PM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>  Well,
>  
>  actually things *are* progressing:
>  
>  <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffkohn-rfc1738bis-00.txt>

  Oops I rejoiced too fast apparently, I see no update or improvement
to the definition of the file protocol definition :-  I also really wonder if Microsoft tool
s would be made compliant to
a new revision of that draft, that would be the only way to be sure
that all implementation actually converge in the end, and somewhat I
have doubts that they would drop support for
    file://c:/sgml/uriincl/uriIncl.xml
 or file:/c:/sgml/uriincl/uriIncl.xml
if the new file scheme definition remained in the spirit of the old one.
Actually file has never been implemented as a protocol, even 1738 warned
about this, really this should be defined as a special scheme using
the opaque_part derivation of absoluteURI if one want to get something out
of a redefinition.
  I'm still pessimistic about this,

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@[...].com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>