[VOTE] DTD schema for skinconf

[Juan Jose Pablos <ch...@che-che.com>]

Hi,
Historically the skinconf file has hold the document type definition 
(DTD)  within the same file. This DTD ensure that the xml nodes are 
correct with that definition.
This lead of problems when this definition is updated, so some of us, 
have put some effort to move out the DTD and replace with a public 
reference:

  <!DOCTYPE skinconfig PUBLIC
         "-//APACHE//DTD Skin Configuration V0.6//EN"
         "skinconfig-v06.dtd">


It can be used by xml editors to identity elements and attribute for 
this file.

The problem with this public reference it that relays on a internet 
connection, but for that issue we have the "Catalog Entity Resolver for 
local DTDs" http://xml.apache.org/forrest/catalog.html

With this, all these xml editors knows how to tread the skinconf.xml file.

The last discussion with Nicola about the skinconf format suggested to 
remove DTD from the file.
To move forward in that discussion,  I would like people to vote:

keep DTD
remove DTD

Cheers,
Cheche

Re: [VOTE] DTD schema for skinconf

[David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>]

Juan Jose Pablos wrote:
<snip/>
> 
> The last discussion with Nicola about the skinconf format suggested to 
> remove DTD from the file.
> To move forward in that discussion,  I would like people to vote:
> 
> keep DTD
> remove DTD

I think this is all moving too fast. The original proposal changed
halfway through the previous Vote and stuff was obviously needing
more discussion. Let us go back there and talk about it.

--David

Re: [VOTE] DTD schema for skinconf

[David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>]

Juan Jose Pablos wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi escribió:
> 
> so you did not propose to remove DTD. It was to modify the format, after 
> futher discussion, we came to the conclusion that that format was the 
> same as turning off validation.
> 
> People did not vote for the removal of DTD, If we want to move futher on 
> your discussion we need to get this done first.

The two issues (structure of skinconf.xml and declaration of DTD)
are actually bound together, so let us make it all part of the
same proposal.

> > I vote -1, as it's against the easy extensibility of it, as I think I 
> > had said in my other mails.
> 
> you should be aware that others had spent quite a lot of time to ensure 
> that this DTD is in place. having a local-skinconf.xml is not too hard 
> to implement and is as easy as modify the skinconf.xml
> 
> If you are againts this, then use -0 as I did for the other proposal, 
> stoping somebody else work is not good for all.

It is important for the future of Forrest that we solve the
messy skinconf thing before we go too much further.

Many of us have done heaps of work on opensource, only to
see it be overtaken by other things. This evolution natural.

Also please remember that you guys are in the same timezone
as each other. Cool down and let the planet rotate a bit.

--David

Re: [VOTE] DTD schema for skinconf

[Juan Jose Pablos <ch...@che-che.com>]

Nicola Ken Barozzi escribió:
> 
> 
> Sorry, but we have already voted for the new skinconf format, and the 
> result has been an ok to go ahead. I'm still not applying it to try and 
> get your +1, but this is just backwards.
> 

¿?¿? on your proposal:

* there is a simple DTD used as a structure (see below)

so you did not propose to remove DTD. It was to modify the format, after 
futher discussion, we came to the conclusion that that format was the 
same as turning off validation.

People did not vote for the removal of DTD, If we want to move futher on 
your discussion we need to get this done first.


> I vote -1, as it's against the easy extensibility of it, as I think I 
> had said in my other mails.

you should be aware that others had spent quite a lot of time to ensure 
that this DTD is in place. having a local-skinconf.xml is not too hard 
to implement and is as easy as modify the skinconf.xml

If you are againts this, then use -0 as I did for the other proposal, 
stoping somebody else work is not good for all.


> 
> In any case, I'd still like to hear what others think about this, as the 
> decision now is for:
> 
> 1 Validation with DTD
> 2 Validation with RelaxNG and namespacing
> 
> I would go for option 2.
> 

I go for option 1

Re: [VOTE] DTD schema for skinconf

[Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>]

Juan Jose Pablos wrote:
> Hi,
> Historically the skinconf file has hold the document type definition 
> (DTD)  within the same file. This DTD ensure that the xml nodes are 
> correct with that definition.
> This lead of problems when this definition is updated, so some of us, 
> have put some effort to move out the DTD and replace with a public 
> reference:
> 
>  <!DOCTYPE skinconfig PUBLIC
>         "-//APACHE//DTD Skin Configuration V0.6//EN"
>         "skinconfig-v06.dtd">
> 
> 
> It can be used by xml editors to identity elements and attribute for 
> this file.
> 
> The problem with this public reference it that relays on a internet 
> connection, but for that issue we have the "Catalog Entity Resolver for 
> local DTDs" http://xml.apache.org/forrest/catalog.html
> 
> With this, all these xml editors knows how to tread the skinconf.xml file.
> 
> The last discussion with Nicola about the skinconf format suggested to 
> remove DTD from the file.
> To move forward in that discussion,  I would like people to vote:
> 
> keep DTD
> remove DTD

Sorry, but we have already voted for the new skinconf format, and the 
result has been an ok to go ahead. I'm still not applying it to try and 
get your +1, but this is just backwards.

I vote -1, as it's against the easy extensibility of it, as I think I 
had said in my other mails.

In any case, I'd still like to hear what others think about this, as the 
decision now is for:

1 Validation with DTD
2 Validation with RelaxNG and namespacing

I would go for option 2.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------