Re: [docbook] Simpified DocBook

[Thomas Schraitle <tom_schr@web.de>]

Hi Dave,

On Freitag, 13. Juli 2007, Dave Pawson wrote:
> Thomas Schraitle wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > I tried your Simple DocBook Schema but I got errors in oXygen 8.2. I
> > transformed your RNC into RNG with trang.
> > I think, the element itemizedlist is missing the namespace from
> > DocBook 5.
>
> jing -c dbtiny.rnc example.xml works fine. No need to convert to rng
> format for validation.

I know, but I mean another issue. :) My idea was to validate your RNC file 
against the RELAX NG schema. I was mislead by the impression that it is 
only possible with the RNG format. However, it seems oXygen can also 
validate RNC files.

Apart from this I get different results between msv and jing on one side 
and oXygen on the other side. Even with the errors msv and jing don't 
complain but oXygen did. To discover these errors, it was not possible 
with RNC, but with the RNG format. Maybe I did something wrong, but from 
my impressions all should give the same results. 


> [...]
> I was wrong.
> Because you are overriding db.itemizedlist,
> the new definition needs to be inside the include.

Right. I thought your definition was on purpose so I left it there. :) 
Thanks for clarifying it.


> default namespace db = "http://docbook.org/ns/docbook";
> include "/sgml/docbook/v5/rng/docbook.rnc" {
>     start = db.article
>
> db.itemizedlist |=
>      element itemizedlist {
>         db.itemizedlist.attlist,
>         db.itemizedlist.info,
>         db.listitem+
>       }
>
>
> etc.
>
> Without the ns definition at the top I get
> /sgml/docbook/v5/rng/docbook.rnc:81:5: error: conflicting ID-types for
> attribute "id" from namespace "http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"; of
> element "itemizedlist"
>
> which matches your error.
>
> I'm not getting a valid file with
>
>[...]
> That validates in Oxygen 8.2 as well.

Thanks for the corrections, Dave.  I would suggest to insert the corrected 
schema into the DocBook Wiki. I can try it (it's long time ago that I 
used the account) but it's your schema and I don't want to claim the 
fame. ;)


Thanks,
Tom

-- 
Thomas Schraitle