Hi, Vince
> I have a couple comments, in context below...
>
> You may wonder why I am being so nit-picky about this, especially so
> early. Well the reason is to help early adopters.
>
> Folks that use the dev build of NetBeans will soon start to create
> apps that target GlassFish Server 3.1 builds.
>
> NetBeans helps folks create the vendor specific dtds (like the ones we
> are talking about now).
>
> If NetBeans helps folks create the right DD file content right now, we
> can change the DTDs that are for GlassFish Server 3.1 all we want...
> and that aspect of their apps will be right and stay right as we
> develop the features of GlassFish Server 3.1.
I am actually glad you brought this up, so we can bring people on the
same page as soon as we can. I will make the necessary changes next week
once we agree on what to do.
Seems we agreed on that we should have one set of the glassfish-* dtds,
and the DOCTYPE should point to "GlassFish Server 3.1". But we still
haven't completely agreed on what versions to use for the dtds yet.
>>> (or even glassfish-web-app_3_1-0.dtd)
>> I don't think it should be glassfish-web-app_3_1-0.dtd, I think the
>> first two numbers mean spec version, unless there is a revision of
>> Servlet Spec 3.0 for this release, we should keep the "3_0" part, and
>> possibly change the last "0" to "1" if we want to increment version
>> here: glassfish-web-app_3_0-1.dtd.
> Why do we want to increment from non-existence to "1", when in the
> past we have incremented from non-existence to "0"?
>
> Having a glassfish-web-app_3_0-1 will lead to the question... where is
> glassfish-web-app_3_0-0.dtd?
But even if we name dtd glassfish-web-app_3_0-0.dtd, people could still
ask where is glassfish-web-app_2_0-0.dtd and
glassfish-web-app_1_0-0.dtd? I think people will understand the
connections between the sun-*.dtd and glassfish-*.dtd and know we
started from there?
What do you think about Bill's suggestion: Perhaps the "simply renamed"
ones should be "-0", and the "new content" ones should be "-1"?
That sounds reasonable to me...
Thanks,
- Hong
>
> I think this also applies to glassfish-ejb-jar_3_1-1.dtd, too?
>
> If it does not make sense to define the dtd contained in the file
> glassfish-ejb-jar_3_1-0.dtd, why not put the content of the file
> glassfish-ejb-jar_3_1-1.dtd into the file named
> glassfish-ejb-jar_3_1-0.dtd...
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - Hong
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>