On Tuesday 04 August 2009 20:50:10 Anthony Bryan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Matthias Fuchs<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sunday 26 July 2009 00:21:55 Anthony Bryan wrote: > >> thanks for the help & info, Eran. > >> > >> yes, please guys, I'm at the point where I'm going loopy re-reading > >> this thing :) > >> > >> please review, esp the relax ng schema. I think there are some problems > >> there... > > > > Hi, > > > > I think the order of the elements of metalink:file and metalink:files > > should be changed. > > > > First the required elements and then the optional. All elements that > > exist for both could be grouped or at least have the same order, that > > would make implementing it easier imo as one could have one class for > > these similar elements. > > > > metalinkFiles = > > element metalink:files { > > metalinkCommonAttributes, > > (metalinkFile+ > > & metalinkCopyright? > > & metalinkDescription? > > & metalinkIdentity? > > & metalinkLanguage? > > & metalinkLicense? > > & metalinkLogo? > > & metalinkOS? > > & metalinkPublisher? > > & metalinkVersion? > > & extensionElement*) > > } > > > > metalinkFile = > > element metalink:file { > > metalinkCommonAttributes, > > attribute name { text }, > > (metalinkResources > > & metalinkCopyright? > > & metalinkDescription? > > & metalinkIdentity? > > & metalinkLanguage? > > & metalinkLicense? > > & metalinkLogo? > > & metalinkOS? > > & metalinkPublisher? > > & metalinkVersion? > > & metalinkSize? > > & metalinkVerification? > > & extensionElement*) > > } > > is this just a reordering so it's easier to follow? I'm not that > informed on relax ng but that's the way I had it, cos it seemed more > logical... > > but I changed it because I'm trying to somewhat follow the Atom RFC, > where the schema elements seem to just be in alphabetical order ( > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287#appendix-B ). > the order of sections/table of contents follows Atom as well, where > Container elements are in order of importance, and Metadata elements > are in alphabetical order.
Ah, brr, I mixed "," with "&". My mistake. :) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
