db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Bouschen <mbo.t...@spree.de>
Subject Re: jdo.dtd changes
Date Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:34:14 GMT
Hi Craig,

I rearranged the elements in orm.dtd to use the same order as in jdo.dtd 
and found a couple of inconsistencies between orm.dtd and jdo.dtd. The 
attached patch changes the orm.dtd to match the elements as defined in 
jdo.dtd:
- Added subelement 'property' to element 'class'.
- Changed attribute 'strategy' in the element 'version' from REQUIRED to 
IMPLIED.
- Fixed 'implement' subelements.
- Fixed order of subelements in elements 'inheritance'.
- Restricted the values of attribute 'primary-key' in element 'field'.

Please have a look at the patch. If there are no objections I would 
check in the patch and change orm.xsd accordingly.

Regards Michael

> Hi Michael,
>
> On Feb 21, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Michael Bouschen wrote:
>
>> Hi Craig,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Just one comment. There is no meaning to the order of   
>>>>> attributes,  just order of elements. But there's no issue with  
>>>>> fixing  the  order of the attributes either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I know the order of attributes is not important, but it helps  
>>>> when  comparing the jdo.dtd and the orm.dtd to make sure the orm  
>>>> dtd  accepts a subset of the jdo metatdata :-). Try 'diff  jdo.dtd  
>>>> orm.dtd', I was surprised to see how many differences  there are.
>>>
>>> Good grief. Some of these are line ending differences. :-(
>>
>>
>> I could not find any ^M problems in the files. I think the diffs  are 
>> because the orm.dtd lists the elements in a different order,  e.g. 
>> jdo.dtd lists the element property between interface and  class, 
>> where orm.dtd lists it between column and field. This does  not 
>> affect the accepted XML, it just makes a comparison between the  two 
>> dtds harder.
>
>
> Not ^M differences, but spaces (I think). I just looked at it again  
> and I can't account for some of the diffs at all.
>
> But the main point is: good. Thanks for changing the files so they  
> are as similar as possible. It will make it easier for us.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Other question: do we want to rename api20/src/dtd to api20/src/  
>>>> schema?
>>>
>>> +1 We need to make sure that the corresponding changes are made  to  
>>> the maven definitions, but I think it's time.
>>
>>
>> OK, I can work on this, but I would like to check in a first  version 
>> of the schema validation test before doing this rename. I  attached a 
>> new patch to JDO-202.
>
>
> Cool. I just looked at your 0220 patch and I think it's time to check  
> these files in.
>
> Craig
>
>>
>> Regards Michael
>>
>> [...]
>> -- 
>> Michael Bouschen        Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
>> mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de    http://www.tech.spree.de/
>> Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33        Buelowstr. 66           
>> Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012        D-10783 Berlin           
>
>
> 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!
>


-- 
Michael Bouschen		Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de	http://www.tech.spree.de/
Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33		Buelowstr. 66			
Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012		D-10783 Berlin			


Mime
View raw message