On 08/11/10 04:33 AM, Dermot McCluskey wrote:
On 08/11/10 01:30, Sarah Jelinek wrote:
software.dtd:
55: im_type - for curiosity's sake, is there a reason this isn't
"img_type"?
No, no reason. I could change this. Dermot, if I make this change
does it mean we have to change anything in the AI client code? We
don't use this for these changes do we?
This element is not currently used anywhere , so you can safely change
it now without anything in the client code needing to be changed.
btw, in the software.dtd comments, can you change:
<full>
</full>
to
<full/>
as this is declared as a EMPTY element.
ok.
Actually, the three EMPTY sub-elements of im_type look like
they might work better as attributes, instead, unless there's a reason
to have them as elements (such as future use)? eg, change:
<!ELEMENT im_type ((full|partial), zone?)>
<!ELEMENT full EMPTY>
<!ELEMENT partial EMPTY>
<!ELEMENT zone EMPTY>
...
<im_type>
<full/>
</im_type>
to
<!ELEMENT im_type EMPTY>
<!ATTLIST im_type completeness (full|partial) #REQUIRED>
<!ATTLIST im_type zone (true|false) "false">
...
The reason I did it this way was that I was trying to allow for
extensibility. That is if they ever extended the image types to include
some options or something that I could add these on as attributes to
these elements later.
But, I think you way makes more sense. If they do make changes I can
adjust img_type to either have more attributes or sub elements. I will
make this change.
thanks,
sarah
*****
<im_type completeness="partial" zone="false"/>
- Dermot
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
