This is the mail archive of the
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: [docbook] SGML support
- From: Pierre Attar <pat at tireme dot fr>
- To: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 17:17:09 +0100
- Subject: Re: [docbook] SGML support
- References: <873by01vjg.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Le 22:58 20/12/2004, vous avez écrit:
At the DocBook TC meeting this month, I took an action to point out
that our current plans for DocBook V5.0 will probably have less
support for SGML than the current DocBook V4.x line.
Our plan of record is to work with a RELAX NG schema from which we
will generate a W3C XML Schema and an XML DTD. The DTD is not likely
to have much in the way of parameterization. It's going to be a
"compiled" product much more than a "source" product. This is a
consequence of the fact that we're taking advantage of some of the
expressive power of RELAX NG. The DTD will be significantly "looser"
than the schema.
Even on the XML side, I se problems on automatic conversion from Relax.
More precisely, for me, the problem of this approach is that if your
company does not handles relax, then it becomes difficult to use docbook
anymore... as soo as you make integration of your own spcific features
(elements, attributes and content models).
Before taking any decisions, it will be interesting to know :
- how many docbook people are using each XML modelling plateform : dtd or
schema or relax
- how many people has made customization that requires extensions and
redefinition.
I recently try to customize the docbook DTD and then generates my W3C
schema (using trang) in order to be able to integrate the result within a
corporate set of XML W3C schema definition ... believe me, it was not so
obvious and there was a lot of thing to suppress in the DTD in order to
fully define them on the schema. There was also a need to XSLTize the
resulting schemas in order to change features that where ne so good after
the trang translation. This was not a trang problem but much more a
preparation of the integration of now contents models using schemas.
I really prefere the old way (4.2) where enginnering designs where taking
into account the specificities of each modelling environment (PE for DTDs,
complex types and redefinitions for schemas, etc.) in order to help people
that where in a specific modelling environment to use the best features of it.
Imagine: if a company is a DTD or a W3C schema expert and they want to make
docbook integration, they will need to become Relax expert just for this
need ! I'm quite sure it is not the best way to think about.
Even more, how will it works with standards like MathML or SVG where, as of
today, there ar no official Relax standard ? We will need to make post
trang conversion in order to remove trang generated information for these
namespaces and replace it by the standard ! That will, once more,
complexify integration needs.
Here are some though, if you want me to develop more and to provide
samples, just ask.
Regards, Pierre
Pierre Attar (mailto:pat@tireme.fr)
Consultant en informatique documentaire XML
Consultant in Structured Document engineering
Projet "Mutualiser l'effort de montée en compétences sur XML"
http://www.mutu-xml.org/index.html