I didn't intend to stall things; on the contrary, I hoped to avoid maintenance and interoperability problems that would soon pop up.
Assuming that you mainly live in a DocBook-processing world and don't need more than one version of the stylesheets, the layout should work for you. It won't work for me. BTW, the LSB/FHS discussion about XML hierarchy and config files isn't exactly moving anywhere. There seems to some consensus that at least XML Catalog files should live separately from SGML Open catalog files. Some, notably Daniel Veillard, also insists that XML resources should live separately from SGML resources, on the grounds that XML is no longer a subset of SGML (e.g., namespaces and XInclude), and that a lot of XML processing will have requirements that are very different from 'traditional' SGML processing. Basically, XML was born in the context of the WWW, and XML is now increasingly used as a data exchange format. If you care to form your own opinion, here [1] is one place to start browsing the thread. While FPIs are still the most stable way to identify XML as well as SGML resources, URIs (in the form of URLs or URNs) will increasingly be regarded as the 'canonical' way to identify XML resources. URLs have the nice property that they map to a local filesystem hierarchy without any packaging effort whatsoever; think of the local XML resources as a cache. [1] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/lsb-xml-sgml/2002-August/000269.html Kind regards Peter Ring On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 04:19, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote: <snip/> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2002-05/msg00222.html > > about a grand unified system of doing things (LSB compatibility, etc.). <snip/>
