 | | Another LENNI Question (geek alert) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | Next techie question for LENNI… including semi-dynamic options for filters. OK, now that I've gotten a pretty good idea of what to do with the LENNI spec (which should have a v0.2 draft this weekend), the one big question that is still bugging me is (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | (...) I like this solution. The schema can be used not only for validation, but can be pulled to get the list of possible values. Quick question though - can't the list of allowed values be specified in the DTD, which we're going to maintain anyway? (...) (20 years ago, 11-Sep-04, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) Right, no need to force software updates every time we add to the list. Hopefully it'll be all back-end. My only real concern right now would be how stable is XSD? I keep running across people trashing it on the various blog sites. But I don't (...) (20 years ago, 12-Sep-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) We at Ascential are seeing our customers, and the big ecommerce standards bodies, shifting away from DTDs and towards schema definitions for XML standards. The major reasons given are that the schema definition is much more expressive than a (...) (20 years ago, 12-Sep-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
