You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com> on 2011/01/08 21:28:06 UTC

tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates. This
behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the template
declaration.

All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.

Regards,

ALex K

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, I'm considering *removing* some things from the DTD as much as adding,
> such as <t:parameter>.

Well IMHO the best is to update the DTD version number when some
changes occur and that should reflect the T5 version where this
changes has occured.

Cheers
-- 
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Also, I'm considering *removing* some things from the DTD as much as adding,
such as <t:parameter>.

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>wrote:

> What I want to avoid is a "well, this template feature was introduced in
> 5.3, so let me hunt around the web site looking for the right version number
> of the DTD that matches".  To me, it's a no brainer: you use a 5.3 feature,
> you need to use the 5.3 DTD.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Kalle Korhonen <
> kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I'd just live with the minor confusion it causes. A
>> reasonable argument for resisting introducing 5.2 DTD that'd be
>> identical to 5.1 DTD is that if a DTD issue needs to be fixed or T5.2
>> for one reason or another still introduces a minor tweak to the DTD,
>> the 5.2 DTD would have already been used. You could of course also
>> argue that if a DTD issue needs to fixed, it always implies a new
>> minor revision, but I prefer practicality over rules set in stone.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Certainly, it should have been versioned 5.1 (not 5.1.0).  There was a
>> stage
>> > where we were trying different things with version numbers.
>> >
>> > However, I think (ultimately) it is very nice to have the version number
>> of
>> > the DTD track the Tapestry version it was introduced in.
>> >
>> > I'm still thinking whether it is good to have a 5.2 DTD that it
>> identical to
>> > the 5.1 (i.e. 5.1.0) DTD.  Certainly, if we introduce new template
>> features
>> > in 5.3 the DTD version will be 5.3.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Mark <ma...@xeric.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
>> >> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
>> >> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
>> >> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
>> >> sync.
>> >>
>> >> Mark
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <
>> igor.drobiazko@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not
>> necessarily
>> >> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a
>> 5.2.0.xsd
>> >> > without any new features feels strange.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the
>> official
>> >> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
>> >> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks
>> templates.
>> >> This
>> >> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has
>> no
>> >> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
>> >> >> template
>> >> >> declaration.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
>> >> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regards,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ALex K
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Igor Drobiazko
>> >> > http://tapestry5.de
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
>> >
>> > Creator of Apache Tapestry
>> >
>> > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>> learn
>> > how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>> >
>> > (971) 678-5210
>> > http://howardlewisship.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>



-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship

Creator of Apache Tapestry

The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn
how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!

(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
What I want to avoid is a "well, this template feature was introduced in
5.3, so let me hunt around the web site looking for the right version number
of the DTD that matches".  To me, it's a no brainer: you use a 5.3 feature,
you need to use the 5.3 DTD.

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Personally, I'd just live with the minor confusion it causes. A
> reasonable argument for resisting introducing 5.2 DTD that'd be
> identical to 5.1 DTD is that if a DTD issue needs to be fixed or T5.2
> for one reason or another still introduces a minor tweak to the DTD,
> the 5.2 DTD would have already been used. You could of course also
> argue that if a DTD issue needs to fixed, it always implies a new
> minor revision, but I prefer practicality over rules set in stone.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Certainly, it should have been versioned 5.1 (not 5.1.0).  There was a
> stage
> > where we were trying different things with version numbers.
> >
> > However, I think (ultimately) it is very nice to have the version number
> of
> > the DTD track the Tapestry version it was introduced in.
> >
> > I'm still thinking whether it is good to have a 5.2 DTD that it identical
> to
> > the 5.1 (i.e. 5.1.0) DTD.  Certainly, if we introduce new template
> features
> > in 5.3 the DTD version will be 5.3.
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Mark <ma...@xeric.net> wrote:
> >
> >> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
> >> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
> >> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
> >> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
> >> sync.
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <
> igor.drobiazko@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not
> necessarily
> >> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a
> 5.2.0.xsd
> >> > without any new features feels strange.
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
> >> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
> >> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks
> templates.
> >> This
> >> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has
> no
> >> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
> >> >> template
> >> >> declaration.
> >> >>
> >> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
> >> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> ALex K
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> >
> >> > Igor Drobiazko
> >> > http://tapestry5.de
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> >
> > Creator of Apache Tapestry
> >
> > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn
> > how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
> >
> > (971) 678-5210
> > http://howardlewisship.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship

Creator of Apache Tapestry

The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn
how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!

(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
Personally, I'd just live with the minor confusion it causes. A
reasonable argument for resisting introducing 5.2 DTD that'd be
identical to 5.1 DTD is that if a DTD issue needs to be fixed or T5.2
for one reason or another still introduces a minor tweak to the DTD,
the 5.2 DTD would have already been used. You could of course also
argue that if a DTD issue needs to fixed, it always implies a new
minor revision, but I prefer practicality over rules set in stone.

Kalle


On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Certainly, it should have been versioned 5.1 (not 5.1.0).  There was a stage
> where we were trying different things with version numbers.
>
> However, I think (ultimately) it is very nice to have the version number of
> the DTD track the Tapestry version it was introduced in.
>
> I'm still thinking whether it is good to have a 5.2 DTD that it identical to
> the 5.1 (i.e. 5.1.0) DTD.  Certainly, if we introduce new template features
> in 5.3 the DTD version will be 5.3.
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Mark <ma...@xeric.net> wrote:
>
>> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
>> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
>> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
>> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
>> sync.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
>> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
>> > without any new features feels strange.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
>> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
>> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates.
>> This
>> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
>> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
>> >> template
>> >> declaration.
>> >>
>> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
>> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> ALex K
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Igor Drobiazko
>> > http://tapestry5.de
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn
> how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Certainly, it should have been versioned 5.1 (not 5.1.0).  There was a stage
where we were trying different things with version numbers.

However, I think (ultimately) it is very nice to have the version number of
the DTD track the Tapestry version it was introduced in.

I'm still thinking whether it is good to have a 5.2 DTD that it identical to
the 5.1 (i.e. 5.1.0) DTD.  Certainly, if we introduce new template features
in 5.3 the DTD version will be 5.3.

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Mark <ma...@xeric.net> wrote:

> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
> sync.
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
> > without any new features feels strange.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates.
> This
> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
> >> template
> >> declaration.
> >>
> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> ALex K
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Igor Drobiazko
> > http://tapestry5.de
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship

Creator of Apache Tapestry

The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn
how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!

(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>.
Shall I file an issue for this ? Would this be something a committer would
be interesting in addressing or is this "below the radar" stuff that's not
worth spending time on ?

Regards,

Alex K

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Mark <ma...@xeric.net> wrote:

> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
> sync.
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
> > without any new features feels strange.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates.
> This
> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
> >> template
> >> declaration.
> >>
> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> ALex K
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Igor Drobiazko
> > http://tapestry5.de
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Mark <ma...@xeric.net>.
For what it is worth, this caused me some confused.  If the TML
version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent.
However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML
5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of
sync.

Mark

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
> every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
> without any new features feels strange.
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
>> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
>> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates. This
>> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
>> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
>> template
>> declaration.
>>
>> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
>> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> ALex K
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Igor Drobiazko
> http://tapestry5.de
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com>.
... but would be harmless, right?

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
> every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
> without any new features feels strange.
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
>> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
>> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates. This
>> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
>> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
>> template
>> declaration.
>>
>> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
>> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> ALex K
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Igor Drobiazko
> http://tapestry5.de
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

Re: tapestry_5_2_0.xsd ?

Posted by Igor Drobiazko <ig...@gmail.com>.
I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not necessarily
every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a 5.2.0.xsd
without any new features feels strange.

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <ak...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official
> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However,
> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks templates. This
> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has no
> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the
> template
> declaration.
>
> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd
> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd.
>
> Regards,
>
> ALex K
>



-- 
Best regards,

Igor Drobiazko
http://tapestry5.de