docbook-apps

  • 1.  Re: [docbook-apps] survey of DocBook 5.0 validation tools

    Posted 12-16-2008 08:20
    > I'm doing an informal survey for the DocBook Technical Committee
    > regarding schema usage for DocBook 5.0. We would like to know among
    > DocBook 5.0 users:
    >
    > 1. Which schema type are you using (RelaxNG, DTD, XML Schema) and why.

    RelaxNG, because it

    - is quite powerful and flexible
    - is very easy and intuitive to read and write
    - is straightfoward to customize
    - works with James Clark's nxml-mode for Emacs

    > 2. What editing tools are you using, and why.

    Emacs, because I use Emacs for almost everything.

    nxml-mode, because it does many things for me, most importantly

    - on-the-fly validation
    - tag autocompletion
    - all the basic stuff (syntax highlighting, auto-indentation, ...)

    For me, its most serious shortcoming is the absence of built-in
    support for XIncludes (together with a choice of "shallow" and "deep"
    validation). I help myself with customized RelaxNG schemas where I
    allow xi:includes wherever I need them in practice.

    > 3. What validation tools you are using, and why.

    - nxml-mode for on-the-fly, "shallow" validation (using schemas that
    allow xi:includes)

    - xmllint --xinclude followed by jing for "deep" validation (within an
    Emacs compilation buffer, of course)

    Why? The main reason is that I heavily use the xpointer() scheme
    (http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/) in my xi:includes, which is
    not widely implemented. This essentially limits me to libxml.

    Jing can use the same compact-syntax RelaxNG schema as uses
    nxml-mode.


    Justus



  • 2.  Re: [docbook-apps] survey of DocBook 5.0 validation tools

    Posted 12-16-2008 09:50
    Schema

    DTD, by default, I think

    Editor

    UltraEdit, a familiar tool; I avoid smarter tools such as XmlMind while I'm
    still trying to master the underlying technology. (I drive a
    manual/stick-shift too.)

    Validator

    xmllint, for xincludes




    2008/12/16 <Justus-bulk@piater.name>

    > > I'm doing an informal survey for the DocBook Technical Committee
    > > regarding schema usage for DocBook 5.0. We would like to know among
    > > DocBook 5.0 users:
    > >
    > > 1. Which schema type are you using (RelaxNG, DTD, XML Schema) and why.
    >
    > RelaxNG, because it
    >
    > - is quite powerful and flexible
    > - is very easy and intuitive to read and write
    > - is straightfoward to customize
    > - works with James Clark's nxml-mode for Emacs
    >
    > > 2. What editing tools are you using, and why.
    >
    > Emacs, because I use Emacs for almost everything.
    >
    > nxml-mode, because it does many things for me, most importantly
    >
    > - on-the-fly validation
    > - tag autocompletion
    > - all the basic stuff (syntax highlighting, auto-indentation, ...)
    >
    > For me, its most serious shortcoming is the absence of built-in
    > support for XIncludes (together with a choice of "shallow" and "deep"
    > validation). I help myself with customized RelaxNG schemas where I
    > allow xi:includes wherever I need them in practice.
    >
    > > 3. What validation tools you are using, and why.
    >
    > - nxml-mode for on-the-fly, "shallow" validation (using schemas that
    > allow xi:includes)
    >
    > - xmllint --xinclude followed by jing for "deep" validation (within an
    > Emacs compilation buffer, of course)
    >
    > Why? The main reason is that I heavily use the xpointer() scheme
    > (http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/) in my xi:includes, which is
    > not widely implemented. This essentially limits me to libxml.
    >
    > Jing can use the same compact-syntax RelaxNG schema as uses
    > nxml-mode.
    >
    >
    > Justus
    >
    > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
    > For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-help@lists.oasis-open.org
    >
    >