About the future format for LFS (reworded)
William Immendorf
computerperson1 at live.com
Mon Sep 1 11:57:10 MDT 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