We identified several points in the proposed /usr/share/sgml layout with which we disagree:
As each non-dtd package creates its own directory, a large number of unrelated subdirectories will eventually populate /usr/share/sgml. The result will be unecessarily cluttered and more difficult to manage. Furthermore, the resulting layout bears little resemblance to other parts of the Debian filesystem, thereby introducing an unneeded inconsistency.
Due to important packages (e.g. jade and various stylesheets) that will only be installed one version at a time, version numbering the directories will be unnecessary and would complicate the packaging of various tool wrappers by introducing version numbers in path components.
Sections R001 and R002 of the specification specify that the names assigned to the top-level directories under /usr/share/sgml/ be determined by one of the following schemes:
Package-derived Names
Based directly on package names
Contain upstream version-numbers
DTD-derived Names
Based on generic DTD name
Not version-numbered (but having subdirectories whose names comply with both A.1 and A.2)
The resulting structure looks like this:
| sgml-iso-entities-8879.1986/ |
| xml-iso-entities-8879.1986/ |
| jade-1.2.1/ |
| openjade-1.3/ |
| ... |
| docbook/ |
| tei/ |
| html/ |
| ... |