Someone might be tempted to suggest XML Schema. However, I
think that approach would be clumsy and burdensome at best. There is
an XML Schema that describes legal use of <Setting> elements to
create configuration documents, but it is limited to
describing configuration documents in a very general sense. It does
not describe what constitutes valid combinations of <Setting>
elements for specific kinds of configuration (e.g., JNDI configuration,
STS configuration, etc.). Although I could envision XML Schemas that
did describe specific valid configuration schemas, I think it would be
extremely ugly.
I would propose that we describe the schema of a particular kind
of configuration using another "schema configuration." Such a "schema
configuration" is simply a special kind of configuration whose legal
structure and constraints are well understood by the management
utility. In other words, the schema configuration would itself have a
well-known schema. Obviously, it could be used to describe its own
schema (just as XML Schema can be used to describe the proper syntax
for XML Schema). However, other than perhaps for documentation, there
is no practical need for it to describe itself. The knowledge of the
schema of a "schema configuration" has to be hardcoded in whatever
application needs it (such as management utilities) in order for it to
be put to practical use. (XML Schema parsers do not rely on the XML
schema that describes XML schema to parse an XML schema. The knowledge
of XML schema is hardcoded in them.)
The advantage of this approach is that we already have libraries
for accessing configuration objects, so the management utility doesn't
have to use a separate set of libraries to access and process a
configuration schema. It can use configuration objects to
both understand a configuration schema and then create a valid instance
of the configuration schema.
Daniel
>>> "Tom Doman"
<TDoman@xxxxxxxxxx> 7/16/2007 9:54 AM
>>>
While we have to document every available setting and how to structure
it for all our configurable components, we also need a way for
management utilities to dynamically provide an interface to allow
configuration of each setting. In other words, we need another schema
to describe this stuff and I was pondering whether we could reuse
concepts and code we've already created here or whether we'd end up
with "chicken and egg" problems. I also don't know how what Markus is
doing might play into this as well as we modify XRDS documents with our
configuration data inside.
Does anyone else have any thoughts or comments on this issue?
Thanks,
Tom
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev