jan at knepper.net
Thu Apr 26 05:57:22 MST 2007
DM Smith wrote:
> For the record, I think,
> It is the responsibility of the module developer to ensure that the
> input to osis2mod is valid. Since there have been several versions of
> the OSIS spec (currently at 2.1.1) it might be a reasonable question
> as to which the minimum version we would accept. I'd go with 2.0 or
> later. As long as Chris is the "pumpkin holder" of module creation,
> it is not a big deal. But without validation being done by osis2mod,
> there is no way to ensure this.
That depends I would tend to think on how the generic
definitions/requirements for a module are written/defined.
In the C/C++ world there is a LINT too... :-)
But I am relatively new to the list, so do not take this too seriously.
> Even with xml validation, it is very possible that an OSIS document
> is not valid OSIS. Part of this is due to the milestoneability of
> some elements, but no schema imparts semantics. So while schema
> validation is important, it is not sufficient. Osis2mod needs to
> ensure that the OSIS is sufficiently valid for the current front-ends.
If this is the case I guess XML validation should be extended with
additional validation to make sure that the data contained in the XML is
> However, my suggestion that osis2mod use a real parser, was not
> predicated on the need for validation. But rather the need to support
> all well-formed inputs.
> Perhaps, I am biased by Java, but I think it can be done without
> impacting program size significantly. In Java, the xml parser is an
> implementation of an interface. At runtime it is possible to specify
> an available implementation. I think that if we were to do something
> similar in C++, perhaps choosing a SAX interface, we could wrap
> XMLTag by it. And then one could link in either Xerces, Sword, or
> some other implementation. Then the size/performance cost would be
> appropriate for the use.
I guess the solution could be a standard parser interface which could be
used by several parsers. I personally happen to like expat. It is small
and fast. But as long as the interface is made *pluggable* in someway
one could even decided to use a NULL interface that does no
checking/validation at all. Could be done in via a dynamic library
interface were a defined set of functions is being exported.
FAX : 609-628-1267
Y! : janknepper
But as for me and my household, we shall use Mozilla... www.mozilla.org
Get legal - Get OpenOffice.org... www.openoffice.org
More information about the sword-devel