Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 91768 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2009 19:41:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Dec 2009 19:41:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 26812 invoked by uid 500); 15 Dec 2009 19:41:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 26699 invoked by uid 500); 15 Dec 2009 19:41:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact solr-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 26681 invoked by uid 99); 15 Dec 2009 19:41:40 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:41:40 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-10.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:41:38 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA6729A0017 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:41:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <993952720.1260906078324.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:41:18 +0000 (UTC) From: "Shalin Shekhar Mangar (JIRA)" To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (SOLR-17) XSD for solr requests/responses In-Reply-To: <9316844.1147979046528.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12790910#action_12790910 ] Shalin Shekhar Mangar commented on SOLR-17: ------------------------------------------- Chris, it seems that you are taking my comment personally. Please don't; it is not my intention to ridicule anyone's efforts. As you can see, this issue has been open for some time now and a major reason is that we have never found a good use for an XSD. I'm merely trying to say that it seems like we're trying to _find_ use-cases for a solution instead of starting with an actual need. My point is that Solr can use it we _want_ to but Solr certainly does not _need_ to use it. I don't think we gain much by an XSD. > XSD for solr requests/responses > ------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-17 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Mike Baranczak > Priority: Minor > Attachments: solr-complex.xml, solr-rev2.xsd, solr.xsd, UselessRequestHandler.java > > > Attaching an XML schema definition for the responses and the update requests. I needed to do this for myself anyway, so I might as well contribute it to the project. > At the moment, I have no plans to write an XSD for the config documents, but it wouldn't be a bad idea. > TODO: change the schema URL. I'm guessing that Apache already has some sort of naming convention for these? -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.