Leo Simons wrote:
> I consider keeping DTDs separate from normal web documents a Good Thing.
> Hence, I'd **really** like them all to be in some directory relative to
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds
>
> Whether it should then be
>
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/phoenix/metadata.dtd
>
> or
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/metadata.dtd
>
> or
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/phoenix-metadata.dtd
>
> or
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/phoenix/metadata-1.1.dtd
>
> or
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/2002/phoenix/metadata-1.1.dtd
>
> depends on the DTD scope and amount of DTDs we are likely to publish.
>
> Following practices from W3C and the like, and considering there is not
> and might not be anytime soon a common repository for jakarta DTDs, I
> suggest we follow this convention:
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/ \
> {PUBLISHING-YEAR}/{SCOPING-SPEC}/{name}-{version}.dtd
Don't see any value in the {PUBLISHING-YEAR}. It does not seem to me tp
provide additional value. It is much more convinient to be able to look
in one place for all of the DTD relative to a particular scope.
> If a DTD is common throughout avalon, {SCOPING-SPEC} is left out.
+1
> so it becomes
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/2002/phoenix/metadata-1.1.dtd
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/2002/merlin/metadata-1.3.2.dtd
Would would also suggest the inclusion of the lastest version:
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/merlin/metadata.dtd
The above URL can be referenced in documetation without concern for the
specific version identifiers.
Combining this with the elimination of the year would result in
something like:
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/phoenix/metadata-1.1.dtd
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/phoenix/metadata.dtd
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/merlin/metadata-1.3.2.dtd
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/merlin/metadata.dtd
Cheers, Steve.
> and if we all ever really do get to agree on some commmon standards:
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/2007/metadata-1.0.dtd
>
> In the event that a DTD is being worked upon but not considered
> "endorsed" yet, the version part of the DTD url should reflect this. It
> might thus be we will have
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/2003/metadata-0901-draft.dtd
>
> I think this setup will satisfy all concerns and is also quite workable.
> If this is agreed upon the naming convention page should probably be
> updated.
>
> regards,
>
> Leo Simons
>
> On Sun, 2002-09-01 at 08:05, Peter Donald wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>We got any standard for locating DTDs? Currently I have been storing them at
>>locations like
>>
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/Foo.dtd
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/phoenix/Bar.dtd
>>etc.
>>
>>However I expect to see more of these little dtds arise over time. Phoenix
>>alone may be looking a separate DTDs for
>>* 2 different component models
>>* role descriptors
>>* manifest descriptors
>>* assembly descriptors
>>* classloader descriptors
>>* management descriptors
>>* security descriptors?
>>
>>Is there a preferred location for all of these? Is
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/Foo.dtd good enough and we live with the
>>fact that there may be 15-20 sitting there. Or do we chuck them in something
>>like
>>
>>http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/dtds/Foo.dtd
>>
>>
>>--
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Peter Donald
>>Sufficiently advanced science is
>> indistinguishable from magic"
>> -- Arthur C. Clarke
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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]>
