commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Morgan Delagrange" <mdela...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [Latka] new Website docs and public DTDs
Date Tue, 29 Jan 2002 17:05:02 GMT
Sounds perfect.

- Morgan

----- Original Message -----
From: "dIon Gillard" <dion@multitask.com.au>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Latka] new Website docs and public DTDs


> Morgan Delagrange wrote:
>
> >I wrote:
> >
> >>My hesitation is that, as you know, the Latka DTD is not one big file
but
> >>several entity files wrapped by a small XML doc.  If we didn't use
separate
> >>
> >>directories, we'd have to put version numbers on all of those files.
Long
> >>term, that seems like a hassle.  In any case, any non-backwards
compatible
> >>change to the DTD should require a major release, so we will be able to
get
> >>
> >>away with one DTD for all 1.x releases.
> >>
> >
> >Or we could just put the _fragments_ in a subdirectory, but maintain the
> >same base directory.  Duh, silly me.  I think you're right, we can get
away
> >with the simpler
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/latka/dtds/suite-1.x.dtd
> >approach if we do something like:
> >
> >  /commons
> >    /latka
> >      /dtds
> >      suite-1.x.dtd
> >      report-1.x.dtd
> >        /1.x
> >          suite.ent
> >          tests.ent
> >          standardValidations.ent
> >
> I've gone and made the directory based changes, so they work for me :)
>
> >
> >That actually segues well into the changes I'm contemplating for the DTD.
> >:)  Right now the main Latka doc looks like this:
> >
> >  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> >
> >  <!-- standard wrapper for the main DTD elements -->
> >  <!ENTITY % suite.ent SYSTEM "suite.ent">
> >  %suite.ent;
> >
> >And inside suite.ent we reference tests.ent, where the user can add
custom
> >tests.  What if we took the tests.ent reference out of suite.ent and did
it
> >in the main DTD file instead?  In that case, you should be able to
reference
> >a _local_ copy of tests.ent, but a _remote_ copy of suite.ent.
> >
> >  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> >
> >  <!-- standard wrapper for the main DTD elements -->
> >  <!ENTITY % suite.ent SYSTEM
> >"http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/latka/dtds/1.x/suite.ent">
> >  <!ENTITY % tests.ent SYSTEM "tests.ent">
> >  %suite.ent;
> >  %tests.ent;
> >
> >Do you think that makes sense, or is it too complicated?
> >
>
> This makes sense, but how about the following:
> - Rather than have all tests, including user-customised ones in
> tests.ent, what about defining a 'custom-tests' entity and including
> that in the dtd file.
> - Given public DTDs, we should be able to set up the XML parser to
> resolve the entities to a local directory/resource like digester does as
> an alternative to the remote ones.
>
> That way the user can run off local copies (for performance reasons) and
> edit the 'custom-tests.ent' file with their own mods?
>
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> http://www.multitask.com.au/developers
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message