I submitted a bug on this to Apache many years ago and pointed out their implementation to Norm, who was not happy. The Apache response at the time was "not going to fix it". The code involved was, at least at the time, pretty deep in the innards. The basic problem is that the code treats an XSD no-namespace schema location as a lookup of an external DTD subset, which is of course very very wrong, but it's why <system> works and <uri> does not. Cheers, E. On 12/13/11 3:36 PM, "Eric Sirois" <
esirois@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Don, > > I would agree with Michael that <uri> would the proper semantic as per the > spec. That said, <system> is in the catalogs so that it can work properly > with the Apache catalog resolver and SAX. Using <uri> does not work properly > with the catalog resolver when you have a XSDs that does not have a namespace. > I've had a number of chats with the developers regarding the issue a while > back. They have acknowledged bug(s) on both the resolver side and Xerces, but > it's not something that's is going to be fixed anytime soon. > > Though it may be technically wrong, it's the only way things work at the > moment, in part, because DITA don't have namespace(s) associated with the > XSDs. > > <system> is there so that it can work with what's currently available as an > open source resolver. > <uri> is there so that a resolver that is fully implemented as per the OASIS > Entity spec can find the documents. > > Kind regards, > Eric > > Eric A. Sirois > Staff Software Developer > DB2 Universal Database - Information Development > DITA XML Schema Architect and DITA Open Toolkit Developer > IBM Canada Ltd. - Toronto Software Lab > Email:
esirois@ca.ibm.com < mailto:
esirois@ca.ibm.com > > Phone:(905) 413-2841 > Blue Pages > <
http://bluepages.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bluepages.pl?searchcnum=009764649&directory= > ALL> (Internal) > > "Transparency and accessibility requirements dictate that public information > and government > transactions avoid depending on technologies that imply or impose a specific > product or > platform on businesses or citizens" - EU on XML-based office document formats. > > > > From: "Don Day (LbyW)" <
donday@learningbywrote.com> > To:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Cc: Eric Sirois <
easirois@rogers.com>, Robert D Anderson > <
robander@us.ibm.com> > Date: 12/13/2011 03:50 PM > Subject: Re: [dita] Bug in XML catalog file > Sent by: <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org> > > > > > This is sufficient, Jirka. John Cowan's explanation provides good background > for how the practice was apparently originally adopted. Curious that it was > promulgated without detection for so long! > Don R. Day < mailto:
donday@learningbywrote.com > > DITA and XML Consultant, Learning by Wrote <
http://learningbywrote.com/ > > Co-Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee > <
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=dita > > "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? > Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" > --T.S. Eliot > > On 12/13/2011 2:28 PM, Jirka Kosek wrote: > Hi, > > today it was pointed out on xml-dev mailing list that there is error in > XML catalog file, see thread >
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/201112/msg00060.html > <
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/201112/msg00060.html > > > More precisely all <system> entries should be removed from the file > catalog-dita-xsd.xml > > Is my email sufficient for fixing this in another release, or should I > file bug somewhere? > > Thanks, > > Jirka > > > > -- Eliot Kimber Senior Solutions Architect "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together" Main: 512.554.9368
www.reallysi.com www.rsuitecms.com