Subject: Re: (dsssl) The Future of DSSSL From: Trent Shipley <tcshipley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 00:16:36 -0700 |
<sub-thread> <header>minutes of first week's discussion</> <sub-thread> <header>Part I</> Since I volunteered to be the secretary and legacy code archaeologist for the OpenJade-2.0 (proposed) [hereafter OJ2(P) project I have undertaken to summarize and organize the debate from last week's "meeting". The contents of the debate will be treated as falling into broad categories. These include project goal(s), philosophy, management issues, proposed management requirements, computer sceince and software engineering, proposed product requirements, and the inevitable "other" category. ------------- <topic><header>Mission</> The most critical problem is the goal remains definition of the general mission or goal of OJ2(P). All are agreed that it would be desirable for someone to do more work on the OpenSP-OpenJade toolkit. Most correspondents seem to favor a significant re-architecting of of the underlying software. In effect, SP and Jade would become parts of an modular toolkit known as OpenJade. The project and the Modular OpenJade Object Library target product would effectively merit increasing the edition number from 1 to 2 (hence OJ2). However, some (most importantly Javier) have made statement that could be taken as indicating support for evolutionary extension of the current code base. Thus the project would simply finish the work on SP 1.5 and move on to OJ 1.4. There are thus two possible goals: Extension and Revision (OJ 1.5, synching the release numbers) Reachitecting (OJ2) Since Javier will be volunteering the students (presumably the projects primary labor resource) he gets to choose whether we pursue one goal, one then the next, or both on parallel tracks. </topic> ------------------------ <topic><header>Philosophy</> Issues of project philosophy tend to come down to conflicts between the XML pragmatists and the SGML purists. It also tends to be reflected in the feature list. In general, purists want implementation of ISO standards. Pragmatists have no objection but tend to add features that would force libraries to be highly extensible (eg. So that the SGML parsing engine could be extended to handle XML-Schemas). Proposed philsophical requirements -- perfection ---- maximum adherence to standards ---- standards implementation ---- CS approach ---- Elegance Pragmatists --abilty to extend code to accomodate W3C and broadest possible audience (Maximum relevance and market appeal.) -- Max (industrial, commercial) utility. In additon there is the question of whether this is the appropriate venue to discuss the future of SGML, HyTime, and DSSSL standards. <opinion> This is a *very* reasonable venue to discuss the ISO markup standards. The project's working group and groupies will be parties very familliar with the standards, their implementation. Thus, we can and should discuss them freely. However, this *does not directly* have any bearing on attempts to implement generic, thourough and correct application of the standards in OJ2 or a subset of OJ2 as a modular and extensible toolkit. The real question is should OJ2 aim to implement the DSSSL standards and *ONLY* the DSSSL standards or should OJ2 assume that the DSSSL standards can be a proper subset (and presumably the default subset) for the OJ2 tool-set. </opinion> </topic> </sub-thread> </sub-thread> DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: (dsssl) Re: DSSSList Digest V4 , Sebastian Rahtz | Thread | Re: (dsssl) The Future of DSSSL, Trent Shipley |
Re: (dsssl) Re: DSSSList Digest V4 , Sebastian Rahtz | Date | Re: (dsssl) The Future of DSSSL, Trent Shipley |
Month |