[Playlist] portability, application page, schema files

[Sebastian Pipping]

Matthias Friedrich wrote:
>> * i think we should talk about the "application"
>>   section on the website again. the current state
>>   is okay but does not really satisfy me.
>>   is chronological order really better than
>>   alphabetal? also maybe all that groups have
>>   different interesting attributes. a lib maybe
>>   license, language and platform. also does xiph
>>   give you mysql access? we could allow the user to
>>   sort for a custom column then. i think it
>>   needs improvement, i want to to help and we should
>>   define how it should be.
> 
> I don't think a database is needed. Sorting by columns can be done
> using JavaScript if necessary.

----------------------------------------------------------
I am against JavaScript here because we will run
into browser trouble then which we can avoid
completely by doing it on the server side.
----------------------------------------------------------



>> * were the offline schema files run through
>>   the test suite?
> 
> Yes, of course.
> 
>>   i noticed that the RNG schema
>>   uses "\d+" as pattern for the version so
>>   maybe we need aditional quality assurance
>>   at that place. (no offense - i try to improve
>>   everywhere.)
> 
> What do you have in mind? Change it so that it only accepts "1" or "2"?

----------------------------------------------------------
Yes. I think we need to have one file per version
unless the scheme language is powerful enough
for stuff like "extension tags not for version zero".
can XSD and RNG do this?

among the new testcases i introduced with libSpiff
are some that check exactly these things.
this one gives "valid" for both XSD and RNG although
it should fail:

xml validate -e -s xspf-1.xsd libspiff_playlist_extension_in_v0.xspf
xml validate -e -r xspf-1.rng libspiff_playlist_extension_in_v0.xspf



Sebastian