Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] strange DTD changes

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

Hi Martijn,

I had a similar reluctance to doing away with the beauty and convention o=
f
XML and <person>.  The reason why we are currently recommending the form
"lo...@us... (Martijn van Beers)" is because that is what
is specified by the OMF spec for <creator>.  To quote the spec:

---
1.      Author or Creator
        Label: CREATOR
        Obligation: Mandatory
        Maximum Occurrence : Repeatable
The person or organization primarily responsible for creating the
intellectual content of the resource. CREATOR should appear in RFC822
format (http://info.internet.isi.edu:80/in-notes/rfc/files/rfc822.txt).
Preferred format: mai...@si... (Full Name)
---

I'm open to arguments for why we should or should not use the <person>=20
tag in place of RFC822.   If we get a concencus, this would be the best=20
time to make updates, but in such a way that it doesn't break OMF files=20
that were written lately.

Dan



On Thu, 17 May 2001, Martijn van Beers wrote:

> Hi,
>=20
> I was updating my db2omf.xsl stylesheet, (the old version is at
> gnome-docu/gdp/tools/db2omf.xsl if anyone wants to add it to
> the 'other resources' section of the omf file manual) when I
> noticed that the current DTD doesn't really deserve the
> term 'scrollkeeper OMF variant', since it isn't a variant, but
> a completely different beast.
>=20
> The initial check-in changelog entry says:
>=20
>         * extract/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd: Adding this file from=20
> 	  Eric Baudais <ba...@ok...>.  It is the OMF DTD
> 	  with a few ScrollKeeper-specific variations.
>  	  Eventually we will feed these upstream.
>=20
> But these are hardly 'a few variations'
>=20
> instead of:
>=20
> <creator>
> 	<person>
> 		<firstName>Martijn</firstName>
> 		<lastName>van Beers</lastName>
> 		<email>lo...@us...</email>
> 	</person>
> </creator>
>=20
> according to the docs, one now has to do:
> <creator>
> 	lo...@us... (Martijn van Beers)
> </creator>
>=20
> which begs the question why use xml at all anymore when you really seem
> to be wanting to parse all the relevant information out of a simple
> string anyway.
>=20
> I've looked through the scrollkeeper-devel and gnome-doc-list archives,
> but I haven't been able to find any discussion that might explain these
> very odd changes. Please enlighten me,
>=20
>=20
> Martijn
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________________________
>=20
> Hundreds of nodes, one monster rendering program.
> Now that=92s a super model! Visit http://clustering.foundries.sf.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Scrollkeeper-devel mailing list
> Scr...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scrollkeeper-devel
>=20