About the future format for LFS (reworded)

William Immendorf computerperson1 at live.com
Mon Sep 1 10:57:10 PDT 2008



Bruce Dubbs wrote:

>> the biggest
>> barrier I think we have, is the fact that xmllint and xsltproc couldn't
>> handle RNG documents correctly.  

>To me this is a show stopper.  We need those or the equivalent programs to 
>generate the book in its various forms, wget-list, etc.

Then try both Saxon and Sun MSV (Multi-Schema XML Validator). However, they need Java, so be preapred for that.

>> After spending all this effort, just to get us to the same state as we're in
>> currently (i.e. can validate and render the book sources), what, definitively
>> do we gain?

>I asked this question yesterday too.  Until that is answered satisfactorily, I 
>don't think the current build method will be changed.  As of right now, I just 
>don't see any significant benefit, but a lot of effort.

The advantage is that we can create elements that we want. Rember, XML is eXtendible. Like a code element that replases the tired old screen and userinput combo.
We can also remove useless elements. 
_________________________________________________________________
Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger.  Find out how.
http://www.windowslive.com/explore/messenger?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_yahoo_082008


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list