Ross Gardler wrote: RG> I think what Ferdinand is saying is that he wants to use a schema to RG> drive an Editor for the site.xml and tabs.xml files.
Yes and Actually, while I'm at it, I'd write one schema for both files to reduce complexity even further. RG> Without a defined RG> schema he can't do that. So his question is, if I define a schema will I RG> break any functionality. Correct. And - having tested that 'any' schema with my limited knowledge - it won't help me because using this schema my editor won't suggest the correct structure of element any more and will validate virtually anything. In other words I wanted the grammar to guide the author, e.g. suggest only a tab-element when we start the file, but suggest a tab or a menu as children for the first tab and so on ... RG> I believe it will break the site: and ext: protocols as I don't think we RG> can use attributes to identify nodes in those protocols (I may be RG> wrong). Certainly the IMSManifest plugin breaks these protocols. So is this definite? Will it break site and ext or will it not? -- Ferdinand Soethe
