[RFC] SRS Section 1

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Feb 1 20:08:36 PST 2005

Hui Zhou wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:18:39PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>> While other formats can also provide this, XML also has 
>> already-existing tools for validating that a document conforms to a 
>> given design, which is very valuable in a tool like this. 


As you've said several times, XML is full of bells and whistles. While 
we do not have to make use of all of these to utilize XML, it is nice to 
know that they're there in case we ever have need in the future.  XML 
provides all that we need (and more) by default and we only need use 
what benefits us.

What's more, the parsing of the LFS book has become a rather important 
part of what we'd like to do, and we'd need some type of XML parser to 
be able to implement that.

XML is flexible, it is (obviously) extensible, it is a full-featured 
option that we get tons of return on with a relatively small investment.

Unless I see a well defined example of something that we could use that 
provides the same functionality (and extensibility!) with less overhead, 
XML is in. As far as I'm concerned, this Section of the SRS is ready to 
go, apart from the links to references and textual changes concerning 
the description of XML.

Guys, are we in agreement?

Jeremy H.

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list