- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 19:19:56 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: mozer <xmlizer@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Robin Berjon<robin@berjon.com> wrote: > On Sep 1, 2009, at 13:44 , Marcos Caceres wrote: >>> >>> It would be straightforward to have a P+C module with a group for the >>> choice of its children, and then for instance WARP could just add >>> <access> to that content. >> >> Nah. I don't like it! Not only does it require a rocket-science degree, >> but it's still means that you need to look in X-number of places to collate >> all the bits of the schema. Like the Internets, this should all be >> centralized ;) > > Don't worry, I'll have your cake and eat it too. > >>> Furthermore, since the schema isn't normative anyway, I think it could >>> just sit in CVS like a software project and be pointed to by the specs. >>> No need to include it in the spec's body. >> >> Yes. This I like. Simple and centralized: >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-schema/widgets.rng > > Good. Cool. So I've made a few changes: > > - renamed it to .rnc since it's in RNC and not RNG > - modularised it as explained earlier — so you can be happy because it's > centralised to a single directory, but it's not a centralised file > - removed the built-in extensibility and used NVDL instead, which is more > appropriate and maintainable > - added support for WARP > - removed a bunch of bugs > - added a bunch of tests (examples from the spec) to make sure it's okay Awesome! Thanks Robin! -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Tuesday, 1 September 2009 17:21:02 UTC