Peter Donald wrote:
>On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:21, Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>
>>>Currently the metainfo packages are different and incompatible. This is
>>>only going to increase over time.
>>>
>>>
>>The DTD for an external form of a <compoent-info/> declaration does not
>>restrict you to the use of a particular meta model. It is simply the
>>criteria for model creation. Currently, the DTD used in containerkit is
>>the same as the DTD used in the Merlin meta.info model.
>>
>>
>
>The DTD is only part of the picture. Currently both products use different
>mechanisms to locate data (different file names) and as they use serialized
>formats by default they will never ever be compatible in that respect.
>
Different files names ?
>>What I'm
>>suggesting here is that components that are put in place to support the
>>current *common* <component-info/> DTD should not be impacted by changes
>>that are not formally introduced as new visions to the *common* defintion.
>>
>>
>
>So change can be blocked if it doesn't go through a "formal process". Hmmm...
>
>
For a common agreed defintion - yes - that doesn't stop different variants.
(not worried about formal processes are you?)
>Still cant see any reason to put it in framework without coresponding code to
>support it.
>
The code handles translation of the DTD to a model specific format. The
*reason* is that a broad spectrum of the community have expresed
interest in seeing a convergence of in the current decleopments dealing
with containers - and that means collaboration at the level of the model
defintion. The very smallest and most primitive agreement seems to be
the external form of the XML files containging a <component-info/>
description. Given a common external form, component authors can write
descriptions without concern with respect to which container/model is
reading it. Code for generating the model is specific to the model
implemetation - i.e. its a container concern unless of course we deliver
a common shared idea of that model - and we don't have that today due to
different requirements. Again, the benefit is to the authors of
components - that can build and deploy components without concern for
meta-level wars.
Seems to me that this is a end-user-plus ... woudn't you agree?
Steve.
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
