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

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

docbook-apps message