Ted Leung wrote:
If we are seriously considering going to a domain specific
XML for 0.7, then I don't think its worthwhile to spend a lot ot time
patching parcel.xml.
+1 (at least I'm realisic about the limitations of what I was
suggesting, hah)
Alec
Ted
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
But part of what I'm trying to do is just
get people to be creative about solutions to this problem. The problem
I see is not that XML namespaces are bad, but more that parcel.xml is
a ridiculously complex system for the few specific uses most
developers will need it for.
Another idea I had, related: domain-specific XML. Right now parcel.xml
is this unifying mechanism for defining all data.. but if users are
mostly defining one or two types of data (UI elements, and maybe
wakeup callers) perhaps we could think about some domain-specific
schemas for some of this.... for example, block XML which would look
like HTML or XUL... in that specific case, we could define a decent
schema which covered 99% of UI declarations, and use things like
namespaces to add custom tags and the like.
I think we'd indeed like to explore this option, but its not really on
the table for 0.6, as it will have a non trivial impact on the
existing code. The schema API was our major step in improving the
situation for 0.6. PJE's namespace proposal is a low-impact,
incremental improvement that is also feasible for 0.6.
That said, I'd love to see a proposal for domain-specific XML that
would work for 0.7...
Cheers,
Katie
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
----
Ted Leung Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF)
PGP Fingerprint: 1003 7870 251F FA71 A59A CEE3 BEBA 2B87 F5FC 4B42
|
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
