SRS

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Dec 14 10:54:52 PST 2004


Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 
>> This obviously isn't anything concrete - consider it your 'starters 
>> for 10' :)
>>
>> What I envisioned happening was that the LFS Book would contain a mix 
>> of DocBook and nALFS tags.  The LFS stylesheets would add a 
>> customisation layer that would render the information provided in the 
>> nALFS tags into appropriate human-readable output.  The nALFS tool 
>> would then simply parse the book, picking out all the nALFS tags, 
>> throwing away the DocBook ones, and doing what it needs to do.
>>
> 
> Sorry if I'm being a little slow here, but a couple of things:
> 
> 1) Do you really mean nALFS, or are you referring to the next 
> generation, ie, the addtional tags that NeoCool defined?

I still haven't looked at NeoCool's stuff properly yet, so I'm not in a 
position to state whether it is in conflict with or complimentary to a 
possible move to Relax NG.  If it's as simple as a couple of additional 
attributes (which I think it is) then it doesn't hinder a move to Relax NG.

> 2) I thought I understood that in the XML world, if a parser doesn't 
> understand a tag or attribute, it just ignores it. So why do we need to 
> use a new Schema definition? (I'm sure there's something I'm not 
> understanding correctly here. ;) )

Well, yes, you're correct...to a point.  What I will *insist* is that 
the LFS book should remain a *valid* XML document, not just a 
well-formed one.  The difference being that if you plonk any old tag 
into the book, then it will instantly make the book invalid XML unless 
that same tag is in whatever DTD/schema the book is validated against. 
Therefore, the *only* way to get more than just DocBook tags and 
attributes into the book sources is to validate it against something 
that understands the fact that XML documents can be composed of elements 
that occur/are defined in different namespaces.  There are a number of 
such methods, but as I've already explained, the DocBook committee has 
already comitted to using the Relax NG format in the future, so it'd 
make sense for the book to go that route.

Hope this helps clarify my position a little more - if not, feel free to 
pester me further :)

Best regards,

Matt.



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list