Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 13:49:35 +0000
From: Tim Larson <tim@keow.org>
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: Version $Id$ style for xml files (Was: SVN behaviour with "Id"
 keyword)
Message-ID: <20050202134935.GE25820@localhost>
References: <802926B6AB8533408C33ADBCA3EE5C2A138D7B@coso.staff.vuw.ac.nz>
 <4200D825.1090100@apache.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4200D825.1090100@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i

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 need that? IMO no, as I don't see valid use cases for 
> analyzing the version string of an XML document or XSL stylesheet at 
> runtime in Cocoon.

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 like sitemaps, cforms definitions, models,
templates, etc.)  Since the work of standardizing the Id's
(to get rid of spurious "CVS" references, etc.) is tedious
I would like to do it only once, hence this discussion.

--Tim Larson