On 13.Feb.2003 -- 09:26 AM, Steven Noels wrote:
> Christian Haul wrote:
>
> >On 13.Feb.2003 -- 09:15 AM, Steven Noels wrote:
> >
> >>Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>So, please, make the scheme as open as possible.
> >>
> >>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=103847911212458&w=2
> >
> >
> >or how about
> >
> >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=104427652624305&w=
>
> Sure, but from what I understand of your proposal, that would mean
> people who develop custom components (not inside Cocoon CVS) would be
> required to add a grammar snippet (and integrate their build with
> Cocoon's build) to have a comprehensive overall grammar. Maybe reLAXing
> the component-specific components might be 'good enough'... what do you
> think?
Right. Although full integration with the build system is not
required. All it takes is to add the snippet to the grammar. And if an
author of an external component does not care about validation --
(s)he doesn't need to. Validation is optional and currently done only
during the build.
OTOH a good grammar would help writing configuration files as there
are editors that can use the schema to offer valid tags.
Unfortunately, it is not easily decidable which options are valid at a
given point because of the indirection short hand -> class name and
the additional inheritance of components from super sitemaps. Hence it
is not checkable whether the configuration is syntactically correct
_and_ is correct for _this_ component instance.
Chris.
--
C h r i s t i a n H a u l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fingerprint: 99B0 1D9D 7919 644A 4837 7D73 FEF9 6856 335A 9E08
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
