[dsdl-discuss] Re: FDIS Text for Part 8

This is not what was agreed in Kyoto. As I pointed out then, there is a need
to be able to define language specific interpretations of entities,
including some of the default ones, for which I believe support for for
define-entity is compulsory. As all that is required to meet this
requirement is to be able to generate an entity declaration as part of the
prolog of the result document I see no reason why it should not be easily
supportable.

Martin

----- Original Message -----
From: "MURATA Makoto" <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
To: <dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 5:43 PM
Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Re: FDIS Text for Part 8

>> My understanding is that section "8 Conformance" says that "... they
>> must also support the optional dsrl:define-entity methodology..." which
>> effectively makes entity definitions mandatory and not optional feature.
>
> Agreed. Martin, please introduce three conformance levels: namely,
> core, entity-definition, and entity-mapping. The level "core" should
> allow
> implementations to refuse entity mappings and entity definitions.
>
> --
> MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
>
> --
> DSDL members discussion list
>
> To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
> command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
> (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)
>

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)