Sean Champ wrote:
'Spam fun' aside, I'm not sure how to put this, or how it could be applicable upon Debian SGML/XML policy. It's a thought, though: There are more 'documentary grammar' formats than the SGML/XML DTD Others:1) XML Schemas - somewhere at http://www.w3.org/ 2) RELAX NG (Compact or {formal?} syntax) - http://relaxng.org/ should be the URL for it
Hi Sean,Yes, the above schema types can be registered in the XML catalog system with no special modification to the policy.
I think I originally only mentioned DTDs to simplify the doc for the average packager. Both SGML/XML policies clearly need to be updated. I'll get to that "real soon" :-)
BTW, I've been given approval to form a subworkgroup of LSB to develop an LSB module for XML (and also SGML) and to act as chairman of said group. The only thing holding up the process (as in a press release & membership recruiting) is that I'm having trouble (for lack of time) trying to configure the mambo website CMS. The workgroup is to be called LSB-XML and has a website here: http://lsb-xml.org (also http://lsb-xml-sgml.org).
If anyone can volunteer to help me configure mambo (mainly to change the default template so that the site looks more like the LSB[1] or Free Standards[2] site), I can get this thing up and running. One of the main issues the group would tackle is a sane XML catalog implementation - similar to the Debian implementation. Our work products will likely go into both the LSB and the FHS standards - at least that's the current plan.
Cheers, MarkP.S. I'm about to upload a new version of docbook-xsl that will break the docbook-website package. Sorry, but I can't see anyway around this...
[1] http://www.linuxbase.org [2] http://www.freestandards.org
I'm not "posolutely sure", as to what support there'd be, in the/an
XML catalogs standard -- support/allowance for: Documentary
grammar files, not necessarily DTDs; I've not a great amount of time,
to make this "a reasearch to-do item", here -- might "get to it",
ever, later.
One tangential though:
Something like "an XSD/RNC/... catalog ... system" would require
support, in the "user/editing agent", for the configuration data and
the general procedures, designed for the catalog system; such could
be nifty -- "beyond the DTD", something that would allow for the fact
that an HTTP connection is not always feasible, from the host where
an appliation woud be running, and so, not always can {an XML schema
file, an RNG file, or what-else} be 'checked', for ensuring "validity
of the document".
"FYI" - whether this would towards a glossary or else, there are two
formal terms, sometimes occurring, about XML documents; the W3C,
somewhere, has normative definitions for these terms, and explanations
-- probably in the core XML standard; "pardon thelack of refs. here" :
1) Well Formed (said of a document / fragment)
2) Valid (also said of a document / fragment)
I don't know the formal definitions of both, but it seems, a
'well-formed' document probably has to be 'valid', first; a 'valid'
document may be not well-formed; a 'valid' (as in compliance with the
syntax and language-grammars of XML, I suppse) a 'valid' document may
still be used -- conceivably -- "to whatever extent", regardless of
whether or not it is, in all, "well formed"
I'm concerned, either: MSFT (Microsoft - MSFT is their "stock-ticker"
symbol) has some interest, invested about XML; I don't like MSFT. Some
discourse, about XML/SGML, in Debian space, remains nonetheless
feasible.
So, like, "hello, list; this is not spam, for the day"
---
Sean Champ
_______________________________________________
Debian-xml-sgml-devel mailing list
Debian-xml-sgml-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-xml-sgml-devel
-- ____________________________________________________________ Mark Johnson <mrj@debian.org> Debian XML/SGML: <http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org> Home Page: <http://linux.duke.edu/~mark/> GPG fp: DBEA FA3C C46A 70B5 F120 568B 89D5 4F61 C07D E242