[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Versions and profiles in RDDL

• To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
• Subject: Re: Versions and profiles in RDDL
• From: James Fuller <jim.fuller@r...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:09:15 +0200
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <434A9BE2.90208@e...>
• Organization: Webcomposite
• References: <434A9BE2.90208@e...>
• Reply-to: jim.fuller@r...
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716)

Robin Berjon wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I guess this is still the list for discussion of RDDL (yeah, some of
> us are still into it!), if not I'll happily take this elsewhere.


yes, I used RDDL for some time...though have changed my approach ...read on.

> I'm in the process of writing an RDDL document for a vocabulary that
> has up to now three versions, one of which has two profiles and
> another three, for a total of (at least) six different schemata.

meta meta meta data.....

> Since it's a well-behaved XML vocabulary, it doesn't change namespaces
> between minor versions and profiles, and therefore there will be only
> one RDDL document. Of course the latest and greatest schema for the
> largest profile (they are all strict subsets/supersets compared to one
> another) will validate all profiles of all versions, but some people
> will want to validate at one given profile of a given version.

so I guess you apply new namespaces with major versions e.g. whenever u
want to imply no backwards compatibility, whenever this occurs I tend to
just make a seperate RDDL document as well.

> Eris forbid, I'm not trying to open up a discussion on versioning. I
> just want to know if anyone has given thought to distinguishing
> between variants of a vocabulary in an RDDL document. I'm know it's
> pretty much an idle exercise since writing it for humans will likely
> be sufficient, but hey in my extremely copious spare time I was
> thinking that if someone had given some thought to this, or had an
> idea of how to represent it neatly, I'd be happy to pick it up and run
> with it.


I think in the scenario you present you want to have a simple versioning
for consumption by end users, not to track edits, or for packaging
(builds)...

I like the simplicity of RDDL and used it for some time, though just
recently I converted my RDDL documents to ATOM....it felt better to get
away from xlink...and I get things like id, updated, published, rights,
etc xml elements for free, no defaulting to something like Dublin
core....and there are plenty of API's out there to process.

I also like ATOM because of its explicit stipulation to cont processing
when it encounters foreign markup...this to me is important for future uses.

Informing your developer users of a new iteration becomes part of a
standard notification mechanism...its also easy to make an Atom feed
look like a RDDL html document (e.g. std css/xslt transform) as well.

gl, Jim Fuller

ps: when u coming back to Prague?

• References:
  • Versions and profiles in RDDL
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Versions and profiles in RDDL
• Next by Date: [ANN] Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML
• Previous by thread: Re: Versions and profiles in RDDL
• Next by thread: RE: [Summary] Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread