Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 63521 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jun 2003 08:48:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 63497 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2003 08:48:44 -0000 Received: from mail.s-und-n.de (212.8.217.2) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Jun 2003 08:48:44 -0000 Received: from mail.s-und-n.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id 8C63DAD10C for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:48:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from notes.sundn.de (ntsrv5.sundn.de [10.10.2.10]) by mail.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id 71330A901A for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:48:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hw0386 ([10.10.2.43]) by notes.sundn.de (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.8) with SMTP id 2003062710485508:13607 ; Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:48:55 +0200 From: "Carsten Ziegeler" To: Subject: RE: resolving the DTDs nightmare Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:50:38 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <1056703121.16411.373.camel@ighp> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 27.06.2003 10:48:55, Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 27.06.2003 10:48:56, Serialize complete at 27.06.2003 10:48:56 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N David Crossley wrote: > Bugger. I was going to look into the Jing code because that would be the > ideal - make Jing use the xml-commons entity resolver. I see that there > is a newer Jing available - will investigate sometime. Great ;) > > Anyway, what do you think of the other issue - the idea of getting rid > of Cocoon's validate-xdocs target? > +1 if forrest does this for us it's ok - I think we should remove all the doc handling from cocoon. By this I mean the subsitemap we currently have that generates the docs on the fly in the built webapp. I hope to move this to forrest as well. Carsten