Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
Well, in that case I would avoid EMF for this instance and we need not
consider whether site.xml is to have a DTD or not. Just a tree editor
with configurable properties on each node will do just fine.
the completely free-form site.xml where each node can have pretty much
any element name doesn't lend itself to a schema / DTD easily. maybe it
would be useful to revisit that decision and switch to a system where
you have
<node id="uniqueid" href="index.html" label="About"/>
this would also enforce that each node has a unique id and is therefore
addressable by site:uniqueid
WDYT?
I think we discussed this to death already ;-)
There are good reasons for us not doing that (all related to the site:
protocol if I remember correctly). There have been a few proposals for a
DTD but none have had a strong enough use case to warrant us disabling
the site: protocol. The current practice is that if we need a valid site
structure document then we simply create a internal plugin (like the
IMSManifest plugin) for it.
Of course, no such decision is ever final. If someone wants to go
through the archives and make a new proposal we'll consider it.
Ross
