Re: [docbook] future of DocBook XML Schema (XSD)?

[Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>]

On 18.10.2016 20:51, Bob Stayton wrote:
> The DocBook Technical Committee is considering dropping the XML Schema version 
> of DocBook in a future version 6.  We would like to hear from any members of the 
> DocBook community who would be affected by this change.
>
> Let me be clear that this change is not on the horizon, but part of our long 
> term planning.  The DocBook TC takes great care in maintaining backwards 
> compatibility on point releases because we know how much the DocBook community 
> relies on stable sources.  When DocBook rolls to a new major version number, we 
> treat that as an opportunity to introduce changes that are not backwards 
> compatible.  The change from 4 to 5 was such.  If we foresee such changes 
> coming, we give the DocBook community very advanced notice to prepare for them.
>
> We will continue to maintain the DocBook standard in RelaxNG with Schematron 
> rules, and will continue to generate a compatible DTD.
>
> However, the process of maintaining the XSD version of DocBook is proving 
> burdensome because it cannot be completely generated by a conversion program, 
> and requires manual tweaking.  Because we are not sure if anyone is actually 
> using the XSD version, we are wondering if this is worth the effort.  If you are 
> using it, or have tools that depend on XSD, please let us know.
>
> You can reply directly to me if you don't want to discuss it on the mailing list.


Hi,

I have to admit that at the moment I do only quite few things with DocBook at 
all, but I am currently writing some DocBook oriented software for my personal 
use. So I am in no way any kind of a "power" user of DocBook.

For my project, which shall include validation eventually, I did some first 
research and was quite disappointed about the availability of libraries that 
implement Relax validation. On the other hand, XML Schema is IMHO the de facto 
standard everywhere else (and validation is part of the Java Runtime), so the 
motion is surprising me. I would have rather expected that the other way round, 
similarly to the drop of SGML in favor of XML.

Just my two cents.

Regards,

Klaus