Re: Is Invisible XML missing from RelaxNG for 3.1?

Sheila Thomson <discuss@bluegumtree.com> writes:
> Am I missing it or are both p:ixml and p:invisible-xml missing from the schema(s) for XProc 3.1? (https://spec.xproc.org/master/head/xproc/xproc31.rng)  If they really aren't there, is this deliberate?  I was expecting the latter, if not also the former.

It’s clearly missing and it wasn’t deliberate. The whole spec build process, especially for managing the relationship between things like the step specification and the construction of RELAX NG grammars is…a bit janky.

Mid-twenty-teens me persuaded the editorial team to make separate repositories for the core specification, the steps, and the grammars. Whatever problem I was solving by doing that can’t possibly have been as bad as the problems it created.

Mid-twenty-twenties me, or perhaps early twenty-thirties me, hopes to persuade the editorial team to let start over with a clean repository for the V.next efforts. I understand Gradle a lot better now than I ever did before.

In the meantime, I created 

  https://github.com/xproc/3.0-steps/issues/687 

and I’m pretty sure we can issue an erratum to fix that grammars.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norm Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
https://norm.tovey-walsh.com/

> 'I have done that,' says my memory. 'I cannot have done that'—says my
> pride, and remains adamant. At last—memory yields.--Nietzsche

Received on Monday, 21 July 2025 06:18:27 UTC