[PATCH] Spec update & schemas for Introspection XML format

Havoc Pennington hp at redhat.com
Wed Jan 4 08:32:35 PST 2006

On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 14:51 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > Thanks, this seems like a good update. I don't know any of these formats
> > so if you want to commit we'll take your word for it ;-)
> I would, but I don't have commit privileges :-)

If you ping the freedesktop people they should be able to set you up -
sitewranglers at freedesktop.org, or at least it used to be. They may want
you to use bugzilla now.

> > Maybe we should designate one of them the "official" schema? It seems
> > inevitable that the set of valid documents is slightly different around
> > the edges for the different kinds of schema, no?
> Yes, W3C Schema / RelaxNG are a much richer language, allowing for more
> precise definition of data format than DTD, so the set of documents 
> accepted by these two should be a sub-set of those accepted by the DTD.
> There's not much to choose between W3C schema / RelaxNG in terms of
> expressivity, so I'd designate W3C schema the 'official' one, if only
> because I'm more familiar with that format. Validation support for W3C
> schema is also more likely be built into XML parsers, than for RelaxNG

Sounds good.


More information about the dbus mailing list