db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian McCallister <bri...@apache.org>
Subject Re: DTD files
Date Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:08:52 GMT
I am in favor of XSD just because of all the tool support for it. 
RelaxNG doesn't have that, yet.

-Brian

On Mar 21, 2005, at 2:46 PM, Matthew T. Adams wrote:

> I would like to see an XSD.  I don't think that it's that hard to read,
> plus the tools out there are really good nowadays to provide completion
> of elements and attributes.
>
> I'd like to stay away from RelaxNG, only because I don't see the XSD as
> being too hard.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> --matthew
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Craig Russell [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]
>> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:34 AM
>> To: jdo-dev@db.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: DTD files
>>
>>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> We have discussed in the JDO expert group that the standard will be
>> published as xsd, but I haven't had time to make the change in
>> the spec
>> itself. The idea I had (which might be completely whack) is to publish
>> the xsd as the norm, and the DTD as non-normative. It is much
>> easier to
>> read a tight DTD than the equivalent xsd IMHO.
>>
>> So far, we have not had a need to make the jdo and orm doctypes more
>> expressive than we can accomplish using DTD. In other words,
>> there's no
>> technical reason to drive toward xsd.
>>
>> If RelaxNG is suitable for use in Apache, I'd entertain using it for
>> our purposes. Do  you have details on its closure?
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2005, at 11:22 AM, Brian Topping wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Craig,
>>>
>>> Yes, this is good.  I'll take a look at that.  From the conference
>>> call week back (sorry I missed everyone this week), we were
>>> considering that the public metadata specs ought to be in
>> XSD, without
>>> DTD.  What do you think of that?  I'm not a big DTD user, so I don't
>>> know what the reasons are that people commonly want to use
>> them.  The
>>> advantages of using XSD are that there is only one spec, that XSD is
>>> much more expressive, and it can be parsed with standard XML tools.
>>> If we are still going to maintain a DTD, I would suggest
>> that it is a
>>> mistake to develop an XSD that is not a machine translation of the
>>> DTD, because no XSD is a better answer than an incorrect XSD
>> resulting
>>> from not being maintained.  And if we are going to do a machine
>>> translation, I'd just suggest putting Trang into the build
>> and make it
>>> a build-time artifact rather than checking it it.  It's a pretty
>>> slippery slope if we don't want to stay focused on XSD.
>>>
>>> Another alternate is to use RelaxNG, which is reasonably expressive,
>>> can be written in XML (so it is can be parsed), and can be machine
>>> translated into both DTD and XSD.  It is not as expressive
>> as XSD, but
>>> if I remember correctly, there are only a couple of XSD
>> constructions
>>> that can't be done in it.  It does add the RelaxNG closure to the
>>> dependencies though.
>>>
>>> Comments anyone?
>>>
>>> -b
>>>
>>> Craig Russell wrote:
>>>
>>>> Team,
>>>>
>>>> As I was checking in the dtd files for jdo2 (jdo.dtd and orm.dtd) I
>>>> had to think again about where we should put the official
>> PUBLIC dtd
>>>> files. For JDO 1, it was clear that the site should be Sun. For JDO
>>>> 2, I believe that the answer still should be Sun, because the JCP
>>>> officially owns the IP to the dtd (and xml schema once we have that
>>>> in place).
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone think that we should change the official web
>> location to
>>>> some other place like the Apache web site?
>>>>
>>>> Brian,
>>>>
>>>> The dtd files I checked in reflect the latest JDO specification
>>>> draft. I understand you're interested in converting these to .xsd.
>>>> The last time I saw an xsd for jdo was when Robin Roos made one for
>>>> an earlier draft. He might be able to help get you started with the
>>>> task.
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>> Craig Russell
>>>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
>> http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
>>>> 408 276-5638
>> mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>>>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>>
>>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message