Message

Reply | Reply all

Date Prev | Date Next | Thread Prev | Thread Next Date Index | Thread Index

From: ec8307 at yahoo.com<ec8307@y...>
Date: Tue Jan 23 17:41:02 CET 2007
Subject: [oc] Automatic Core Metrics and Documentation
I need an XML storage testbench, do you know any?

ec8307@y...

----- Original Message -----
From: Miha Lampret <mlampret@o...>
To: cores@o...
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 11:48:45 +0000
Subject: Re: [oc] Automatic Core Metrics and Documentation

>
>
> I agree with Tom that Wiki is not suitable for OC because it is
> impossible to
> have general look for all projects.
>
> XML would be great for project documents but I am not sure if
> editing of
> project pages as XML documents would be easy enough for
developers.
> Probably
> we need a tool/editor. In my opinion web editing is still best
> solution
> because it only requires browser and can be done from home, office
> or
> anywhere. From view of web developer the problem of XML
documents
> is that
> searching through them is very slow in comparison with SQL
> database. For
> example.. on the first OC page there is a scetion called 'Last
> updated'. If I
> want to display it dinamically I have to load XML document of each
> project
> and check LastUpdated tag. Of course this can be done by task
> running from
> cron but souch things makes development and maintaince of OC web
> complicated.
>
> My suggestion is that we continue to use SQL database together with
> XML. First
> step is to define OCProject shema then redefine SQL database
> structure which
> will be based on schema and implement export to XML, pdf, etc..
> (for project
> pages and project documents). I think that for page editing web
> interface is
> still the best, XML can be used for documentation and other project
> documents.
>
> regards,
> Miha
>
> On Monday 12 May 2003 11:16 pm, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> > On Friday 09 May 2003 06:04 am, Tom Hawkins wrote:
> > > On Friday 09 May 2003 05:07 pm, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > > Regarding documentation, I would recommend DocBook
> format, as it is
> > >
> > > I wouldn't recommend DocBook for OC for one reason: We
> don't
> > > need the generality and
> > > complexity of DocBook. But what we do need are specific
> tags for
> > > core documentation, such as specifying a core's
> interface:
> >
> > I think there are two things being discussed at the same time.
> > 1. Metadata.
> > 2. Documentation.
> >
> > When I say,"Documentation", I typically refer to "bread text",
> english,
> > written so any normal human being can understand it, so to
> speak.
> >
> > Metadata is software term for what engineers say
> "specification" or
> > "datasheet" and so on.
> >
> > Both are valid in this discussion.
> >
> > DocBook was recommended only for the "documentation" part
> above.
> >
> > The beauty of XML is that you can aggregate (merge) documents,
> without
> > loosing track of what is what.
> >
> > To define an OpenCore schema (or DTD if you prefer) should
> also be no
> > problem, and these can, as you say, build a lot of HTML
> content
> > automatically (kind of), which would be nice.
> >
> > > Wiki is a cool idea, but I'm not sure this type of
> freedom is good for
> > > OC.
> >
> > Ok. Cocoon mentioned above, introduce Wiki recently, and in a
> matter of
> > weeks, the documentation of Cocoon was improved by a magnitude
> or more. And
> > looks really good. > > > > > Therefore, I propose the following: OC projects enter > ALL information > > > into an XML document that must adhere to the > OcProject.DTD. This > > > includes: > > > - General Information > > > - Project News > > > - Core(s) Documentation > > > - Module Information and Compile/Build Constraints > > > - Testbench Information > > > > It's a good start. Everyone, try not to do everything in one > go. > > Evolutionary changes is probably advisable, or things won't > take off. > > > > Cheers. > > Niclas >