Dick Hamilton | 1 Apr 23:40 2010

GSoC Mentor requests

For prospective mentors:

When you make a mentor request on the gsoc website, please send me an
email message (hamilton <at> xmlpress.net) identifying who you are. The
requests come to me with only the id, which often does not help me
identify the person sending in the request.

Because some mentor requests are clearly spam, we won't be accepting any
requests where we don't know who the prospective mentor is.

Also, since I'll need to be able to reach prospective mentors over the
next couple of weeks, please include your contact information with your
message.

Best Regards,
Dick
---------------------------------
XML Press
XML for Technical Communicators
http://xmlpress.net
(970) 231-3624 
Norman Walsh | 2 Apr 01:18 2010

Re: DocBook Publishers DTD

Norman Walsh <ndw <at> nwalsh.com> writes:
> Here's a better version. I've fixed the duplicate attribute
> declarations caused by attribute co-constraints and a number of other
> little bugs. The dcterms: namespaced elements should also work better.

Here's an even better still version. This now passes muster in Xerces
and Saxon. Like the base DocBook DTD, I think it's interesting that
nsgmls reports ambiguous content models that neither Xerces nor Saxon
notice. For the moment, I'm not going to try to fix those, I'm not
sure it's practical.

Attachment (publishers.dtd): application/octet-stream, 231 KiB

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw <at> nwalsh.com>      | Chinese Proverb: He who asks is a
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | fool for five minutes, but he who
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | does not ask remains a fool
                                   | forever.
Norman Walsh | 2 Apr 01:17 2010

Re: DocBook V5.0 DTD

Norman Walsh <ndw <at> nwalsh.com> writes:
> I've checked in (most of) the sources, but I haven't quite got all the
> bits lined up. Rather than wait until I do, here's a copy of the DTD that
> my process builds. Any feedback most appreciated.

I've fixed a few more problems. This now passes muster in Xerces and
Saxon. I think it's interesting that nsgmls reports ambiguous content
models that neither Xerces nor Saxon notice. For the moment, I'm not
going to try to fix those, I'm not sure it's practical.

Attachment (docbook.dtd): application/octet-stream, 350 KiB

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw <at> nwalsh.com>      | Men never do evil so completely
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | and cheerfully as when they do it
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | from a religious
                                   | conviction.--Blaise Pascal
George Cristian Bina | 2 Apr 09:19 2010

Re: Re: DocBook Publishers DTD

Hi Norm,

You may find interesting Tim Bray's comment [1] on that in his annotated 
XML spec [2]:

[1] http://www.xml.com/axml/notes/Determinism.html
***
Deterministic Grammars

This stuff is not worth worrying about. This rule was inherited from 
SGML; its inclusion in SGML was actually a design error. This was 
retained in XML not only for compatibility with SGML (not quite a good 
enough reason; I voted against it) but because some of the most popular 
existing SGML tools actually rely on it for certain internal optimizations.

It's likely that quite a few XML products will never bother checking for 
violations of this rule, because it's hard; if you're writing a DTD and 
you get a complaint about a nondeterministic content model, then you 
might find it worthwhile to read the appendix.
***

[2] http://www.xml.com/axml/target.html#determinism

Best Regards,
George
--

-- 
George Cristian Bina
<oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger
http://www.oxygenxml.com

(Continue reading)

Jirka Kosek | 2 Apr 09:48 2010
Picon

Re: Re: DocBook Publishers DTD

Norman Walsh wrote:
> Norman Walsh <ndw <at> nwalsh.com> writes:
>> Here's a better version. I've fixed the duplicate attribute
>> declarations caused by attribute co-constraints and a number of other
>> little bugs. The dcterms: namespaced elements should also work better.
> 
> Here's an even better still version. This now passes muster in Xerces
> and Saxon. Like the base DocBook DTD, I think it's interesting that
> nsgmls reports ambiguous content models that neither Xerces nor Saxon
> notice. For the moment, I'm not going to try to fix those, I'm not
> sure it's practical.

Are you sure that nsgmls is right there? It has been long time, but IIRC
ambiguity rules are little bit more relaxed in XML.

My experience is that xmllint is the most picky one and it has some
complaints:

publishers.dtd:6452: validity error : Definition of bibliomixed has
duplicate re
ferences to publisher
>
 ^
publishers.dtd:6452: validity error : Definition of bibliomixed has
duplicate re
ferences to title
>
 ^
publishers.dtd:6474: validity error : Definition of bibliomset has
duplicate ref
(Continue reading)

Sandra Sendra | 2 Apr 15:42 2010
Picon

3rd CfP: INTERNET 2010 || September 20-25, 2010 - Valencia, Spain


INVITATION:

=================
Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to
submit and publish original scientific results.
=================

============== INTERNET 2010 | Call for Papers ===============

CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS

INTERNET 2010: The Second International Conference on Evolving Internet
September 20-25, 2010 - Valencia, Spain

General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2010/INTERNET10.html

Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2010/CfPINTERNET10.html

Submission deadline: April 20, 2010

Sponsored by IARIA, www.iaria.org

Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org
Publisher: CPS ( see: http://www2.computer.org/portal/web/cscps )
Archived: IEEE CSDL (Computer Science Digital Library) and IEEE Xplore
Submitted for indexing: Elsevier's EI Compendex Database, EI's Engineering Information Index
Other indexes are being considered: INSPEC, DBLP, Thomson Reuters Conference Proceedings Citation Index

Please note the Poster Forum and Work in Progress options.
(Continue reading)

Sandra Sendra | 2 Apr 15:47 2010
Picon

3rd CfP: ACCESS 2010 || September 20-25, 2010 - Valencia, Spain


INVITATION:

=================
Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to
submit and publish original scientific results.
=================

============== ACCESS 2010 | Call for Papers ===============

CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS

ACCESS 2010: The First International Conferences on Access Networks, Services and Technologies
September 20-25, 2010 - Valencia, Spain

General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2010/ACCESS10.html
Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2010/CfPACCESS10.html

Submission deadline: April 20, 2010

Sponsored by IARIA, www.iaria.org
Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org
Publisher: CPS ( see: http://www2.computer.org/portal/web/cscps )
Archived: IEEE CSDL (Computer Science Digital Library) and IEEE Xplore
Submitted for indexing: Elsevier's EI Compendex Database, EI's Engineering Information Index
Other indexes are being considered: INSPEC, DBLP, Thomson Reuters Conference Proceedings Citation Index

Please note the Poster Forum and Work in Progress options.

The topics suggested by the conference can be discussed in term of concepts, state of the art, research,
(Continue reading)

Muhammad Rehan Shaukat | 6 Apr 01:38 2010
Picon

GSoC 2010 - Integration of BoostBook with DocBook

Hi,


I have submitted the proposal for GSoC, titled as: "Integration of BoostBook with DocBook". This project is proposed by Stefan Seefeld. Please find the abstract below:

"BoostBook is a part of Boost project and provides the mechanism for documentation of C++ libraries. The existing implementation of BoostBook is based on the data type definition (DTD) format. DocBook is a semantic markup language for technical documentation. DocBook v5.0 is based on the REgular LAnguage for XML Next Generation (RLEAX NG) format that is more flexible than DTD and XML schema. There is a need to merge the BoostBook with DocBook v5.0 in order to extend the existing functionality of DocBook to document APIs. The successful integration of BoostBook with DocBook will enable the DocBook to provide vocabulary for both technical and API documentations."


Looking forward to hear comments or suggestions.


Thanks & Regards,

Erasmus Student
The University of Reading, UK
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
The University Of Carlos III, Madrid Spain
maxwell | 6 Apr 02:05 2010
Picon

Re: GSoC 2010 - Integration of BoostBook with DocBook

On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 00:38:15 +0100, Muhammad Rehan Shaukat
<rehan.shaukat <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> I have submitted the proposal for GSoC, titled as: "Integration of
> BoostBook
> with DocBook". This project is proposed by Stefan Seefeld. Please find
the
> abstract below:
> 
> ...There is a need to merge the BoostBook with DocBook
> v5.0 in order to extend the existing functionality of DocBook to
document
> APIs. The successful integration of BoostBook with DocBook will enable
the
> DocBook to provide vocabulary for both technical and API
documentations."*

I don't know if it's my place to comment on this, but I will even if I
shouldn't :-().

IMHO, DB is already *far* too cluttered with constructs that are specific
to programming languages.  Rather than add more programming language
"stuff", I think what's already in DB should be moved into one or more
separate libraries or modules, preferably with their own namespace.  A
namespace change for some subset will be non-backwards compatible, but I
don't think that's a reason to avoid it.

   /s/
   A happy user of a subset of DocBook
   (Mike Maxwell)
Stefan Seefeld | 6 Apr 04:22 2010
Picon

Re: GSoC 2010 - Integration of BoostBook with DocBook

On 04/05/2010 08:05 PM, maxwell wrote:
>
> IMHO, DB is already *far* too cluttered with constructs that are specific
> to programming languages.  Rather than add more programming language
> "stuff", I think what's already in DB should be moved into one or more
> separate libraries or modules, preferably with their own namespace.  A
> namespace change for some subset will be non-backwards compatible, but I
> don't think that's a reason to avoid it.
>    

I fully agree with what you are saying, and can happily confirm that 
this is indeed the idea: The added vocabulary will go into an extension 
profile, and thus be available as a separate module, to be explicitly 
referenced from a different namespace.

In fact, I hope that a similar strategy may be chosen for other ports, 
such as the Website and Slides vocabularies, when they are ported to 
DocBook 5.

         Stefan

--

-- 

       ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

Gmane