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.

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list