To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.publishOpen lugnet.publish in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Publishing / 4664
4663  |  4665
Subject: 
Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.publish
Date: 
Sun, 12 Sep 2004 06:15:05 GMT
Viewed: 
2488 times
  
In lugnet.publish, Dan Boger wrote:
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 05:31:49AM +0000, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
First possibility: [XSD, XML Schema Definition]. I believe RSS 2.0
supports XSD, but I'm not absolutely sure. I know 0.92 doesn't, and
I'm staying as far away from RDF-centric RSS 1.0 as possible. Also, I
think Atom can be extended to use XSD, but again, I'm not sure. Any
clarification is helpful.

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?  I guess you were refering to that in
the parts I snipped before, saying you don't want to release a new
version of the DTD every time we need to modify the theme list.

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 know if they're onto
something, or just being uppity. It's so hard to tell, with all the 'tude being
slung around.

I agree - the spec should probably specify that a local cache should be
kept, and maybe even how often updates should be checked for.

But I like the solution in general - a way to keep the standard list of
options, easy to update, and easy to propagate.

Exactly. Thanks for the reality check.

BTW, I've finished the first "real" draft of the spec, and put it online,
Posting it another thread.

- Kelly



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert)
 
(...) 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)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Another LENNI Question (geek alert)
 
(...) 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)

4 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR