Hi,
On 2 Feb 2005, at 14:43, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
So I'm more than ok with formalizing a syntax for the Id string and
other metadata for later analysis, but using specially-formatted
comments. There used to be an xsldoc project at http://www.xsldoc.org/
that was producing javadoc-like
Hi,
On 2 Feb 2005, at 16:38, Tim Larson wrote:
If nobody objects within then next little bit, I will use:
!--
Any text already present...
(A blank line between the text above and the version below?)
I wouldn't worry about the blank line. It's not needed in Javadoc.
@version $Id$
--
Tim Larson wrote:
I personally do not like including a reference to the
revision control system, especially since we have already
experienced the data moving from one rcs system to another,
invalidating all the CVS comments. FWIW, I fully expect
another move in the future (not yet, don't get
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved unambiguously with an XPath query:
processing-instruction('version')
Question is: do we need that? IMO no, as I don't see valid use cases for
analyzing the
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 02:39:49PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved
unambiguously with an XPath query: processing-instruction('version')
Question is: do we
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 01:49:35PM +, Tim Larson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 02:39:49PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved
unambiguously with an
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:39:49 +0100, Sylvain Wallez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved unambiguously
with an XPath query:
processing-instruction('version')
Tim Larson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 02:39:49PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved
unambiguously with an XPath query: processing-instruction('version')
Tim Larson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 03:43:19PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Tim Larson wrote:
I like the idea of having _some_ way to access the version
info in xml files, because someday we may have tools like
javadocs which would collect and display this info (think
for xml files
Tim Larson wrote:
As part of my effort to keep whiteboard/forms mergeable,
I am fixing a bunch of Id's and ran across a minor issue.
How do we want to mark the version in xml files? There
is quite a variety+possibilities:
CVS $Id$
SVN $Id$
!--+
| $Id$
+--
Version $Id$
version $Id$
Tim Larson wrote:
As part of my effort to keep whiteboard/forms mergeable,
I am fixing a bunch of Id's and ran across a minor issue.
How do we want to mark the version in xml files? There
is quite a variety+possibilities:
CVS $Id$
SVN $Id$
!--+
| $Id$
+--
Conal Tuohy wrote:
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This has the advantage over a comment that it can be retrieved unambiguously with an XPath query:
processing-instruction('version')
Cheers
Con
Sure, that works too.
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 01:20:10PM -0800, Ralph Goers wrote:
Tim Larson wrote:
As part of my effort to keep whiteboard/forms mergeable,
I am fixing a bunch of Id's and ran across a minor issue.
How do we want to mark the version in xml files? There
is quite a variety+possibilities:
snip/
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 10:35:03AM +1300, Conal Tuohy wrote:
Tim Larson wrote:
As part of my effort to keep whiteboard/forms mergeable,
snip/
Could we pick a style, and then I will make the files I
happen to touch match it?
What about a processing instruction?
?version $Id$?
This
Tim Larson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 10:35:03AM +1300, Conal Tuohy wrote:
Tim Larson wrote:
As part of my effort to keep whiteboard/forms mergeable,
snip/
Could we pick a style, and then I will make the files I
happen to touch match it?
What about a processing
15 matches
Mail list logo
