RelaxNG support on nALFS?
jwrober at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Nov 30 13:42:00 PST 2004
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> James Robertson wrote:
>> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>> Well, depends on your definition of "easy" I suppose :) Bear in mind
>>> that (I think) we'd like a syntax that those not proficient with the
>>> various XML-related specs/technologies can easily adapt for their own
>>> uses. Sure, given enough example profiles, customising xpointer
>>> syntax may be entirely suitable. I was thinking of something like a
>>> top-level <alfsCollection> tag or something, that would then allow
>>> one or more <alfs> children underneath it. Like your change, it
>>> would only require a change to the top-level LFS.xml profile.
>> That would be a DTD change? Is there a way to get nALFS to rad the
>> profile in and "figure out" what method was used to then allow
> I was assuming DTD/schema changes would be permissible for nALFS2, hence
> the suggestion. If that's not possible then neither is validation IMO.
> An XML document is either entirely valid (proved via validation), or
> you hope for the best by not doing any validation and accepting anything
> that is thrown at you. Although there is some value in implementing
> something like "Validate everything except LFS.xml" I doubt it's
> expected behaviour from a validating parser.
Oh sure, DTD changes are definitely in for the new tool. We just need
to come up with suggested changes and get them in BZ. See what I am
More information about the alfs-discuss