Re: SGML entity mgmt stds

[Ralph Ferris <ralph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 15:22:08 -0400
>From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: SGML entity mgmt stds (was Re: ISUG and DSSSL)

>Didier Martin wrote:
>I do not have the same structure as specified in this document but I do not
>see any problem to adapt to it. It seems that the proposed structure is:
>
>SGML
>  |__ DTD
>  |__ entity
>  |__ Stylesheet
>  |__ misc
>
>I would have only one reserve about the "stylesheet" directory. I would call
>that "scripts" instead because it may be also other thing than strict
>stylesheet scripts. 
>
>The referred document do not have a dir for catalogs. this seems to be an
>omission. My suggestion would be to have this structure (includes the one
>from the referred doc)
>
>SGML
> |__ DTD
> |__ catalog
> |__ entity
> |__ scripts
> |__ misc.
>
>What do you think? Ralph, your comments. Would it be difficult on your side
>to modify your dir structure? What do you suggest?

The structure of the HyBrick distribution is closer to the first proposal,
in that it doesn't have a separate catalog directory. To take into account
the requirements for "general" SGML vs XML-specifc processing, there's a
catalog in each directory. The overall structure is:

Samples
 |__ dtd
 |__ styles
 |__ pics
 |__ exampleDir-1
 |__ ...
 |__ exampleDirn-n

This arrangement allows the xml.dcl declaration to be called for XML files,
while allowing the DTDs for DSSSL to be processed as SGML. In general, the
one catalog per directory arrangement seems more flexible that a
centralized one, although possibly the same results could be obtained. 

I can see the point about "scripts" in places of "styles" or "stylesheets"
and don't have any problems with making the change.


Best regards,
 
Ralph E. Ferris
HyBrick Program Manager
Fujitsu Software Corporation
HyBrick: http://www.fsc.fujitsu.com/hybrick/


 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist