Hmm, XML Schema might not be a suitable enough means to map our configuration schema. I've just tried to make my main debug config file validate with your schema. I've had to extend it a bit but still ended up having a validation error I did not quite understand. It kept asking for the "fonts" or "xml-handler" elements although they are both optional. I've never done much XML Schema and never liked it much. I don't know much about RelaxNG either, but I repeatedly hear that it's more flexible. I know that you can define several variants of the same element by chosing the type using an attribute (renderer with mime attribute). I don't know if that can be done in XML Schema. Shrug.
I can upload my changes but due to the fact that they don't work for me makes me hesitant to upload them. On 16.07.2006 21:40:22 Simon Pepping wrote: > On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 07:31:52PM -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Author: spepping > > Date: Sun Jul 16 12:31:52 2006 > > New Revision: 422509 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=422509&view=rev > > Log: > > A W3C schema for FOP user configuration files > > > > Added: > > xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/foschema/fop-configuration.xsd (with props) > > Once too often I lost time due to a slightly wrong configuration > file. FOP tries to find the elements it knows about; it does not give > feedback on elements that it does not know about. This schema should > help users discover which of their elements FOP does not > recognize. Probably the content of some elements can be constrained > further. Please, do so if you see such an element. If this schema is a > good idea, I will document it on the configuration page of the web > site. Jeremias Maerki
