Work at SourceForge, help us to make it a better place! We have an immediate need for a Support Technician in our San Francisco or Denver office.

Close

#420 Mention listChange in 2.5 Revision Description

AMBER
closed-accepted
Lou Burnard
5
2013-04-29
2013-01-01
John P. McCaskey
No

Text in 2.5 The Revision Description now reads

The log consists of a list of entries, one for each change. This may be encoded using either the regular list element, as described in section 3.7 Lists or as a series of special purpose change elements, each of which contains a more detailed description of the changes made.

I suggest mention be made of <listChange>.

Discussion

  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    Certainly should be mentioned in the prose, and I have made that change at rev 11317. But I cannot see why we allow either a bunch of changes wrapped in a <revisionDesc> or a bunch of changes wrapped in a <listChange> wrapped in a <revisionDesc>. What's the added value of <listChange> here?

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    • milestone: --> AMBER
     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    • assigned_to: nobody --> louburnard
    • status: open --> open-accepted
     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-01-04

    I think the idea is that you can have multiple <listChange> elements, to group different types of changes, isn't it?

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    Yes, Martin, so you might think. Unfortunately, (or not) the content model only permits this if you nest them

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-01-05

    That's fair enough, surely: if you don't care about grouping your <change>s, you just have them as direct children of <revisionDesc>, but if you do, you start with a <listChange> and nest them as necessary. The value of <listChange> is to provide that nesting option, and you might use it without nesting in a project in which there are other files which do use nesting, for the sake of structural coherence across the project (in which case you might customize the schema to disallow <change> as a direct child of <revisionDesc>).

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-04-29

    • status: open-accepted --> closed-accepted
     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-04-29

    Closing now as there does not seem to be any need for further change