Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Redesign how grammar files are structured for delivery #22

Closed
robander opened this issue May 9, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

Redesign how grammar files are structured for delivery #22

robander opened this issue May 9, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@robander
Copy link
Contributor

robander commented May 9, 2017

Discussed at TC May 9, 2017, and at some earlier meetings.

Robert suggested a goal that will give us a stronger focus on RNG as the main delivery format for modular grammar files, and remove the requirement (or even the suggestion) that DTD or XSD implementations must be modular to comply with the spec. Going into the future, best practice as laid out by the TC would be to maintain grammar files in RNG, and generate monolithic DTD or XSD as needed for applications that do not use RNG.

There are open questions remaining after the May 9 meeting:

  • Should OASIS deliver modular DTD files with 2.0 (as opposed to monolithic DTDs)? Pro: it will allow existing DTD users to upgrade more easily, and shift to RNG over time. Con: additional maintenance burden on the TC could slow down development, and uncertain if tools will be able to fully automate this.
  • There is general agreement on not shipping modular XSD files. Should OASIS deliver monolithic XSD versions of the grammar files? Pro: at least a few editors currently require XSD and could use it. Con: additional time to generate and test will cause some amount of delay.
@keberlein
Copy link
Contributor

Link to minutes for 9 May 2017:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201705/msg00022.html

@gershonj
Copy link

Would this redesign fix the current inability to constrain content models in RNG? In order to constrain an existing element's contents, one needs to change the base module. This is not how DITA constraints are supposed to work -- one should never ever have to constrain the base definition provided with the spec...

@robander
Copy link
Contributor Author

robander commented Mar 3, 2020

@gershonj I don't think this item (as discussed so far) would impact how constraints are created.

That said, I did not think that RNG constraints required that you modify the base module files, it's done by overriding rather than by changing.

@robander
Copy link
Contributor Author

robander commented Mar 3, 2020

Marking this closed - I think these decisions have already been made (we are still maintaining modular DTD files, and not shipping XSD). The busy work of fixing up file names / directories is covered under #170.

@robander robander closed this as completed Mar 3, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants