On Fri, 2002-10-04 at 04:51, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
If we've got the URLs, then ...
Ville> possibly provide some kind of user interface for the
Ville> installation.
... this is a must. Furthermore, it should be generic. Cf the edict
package (it's in Mule), edict-update.el as a not-even-first cut. This
is _not_ an acceptable implementation. But we really should provide
something that front-ends for installing data from URLs to "where
XEmacs expects them to be." Also, there should be a tool (maybe just
a shortcut to Customize) that knows how to configure most XEmacs data
paths.
Sounds good to me.
Ville> psgml does not require psgml-dtds, IMO that's the
way it
Ville> should be.
I agree, but we should make it easier to figure out what's going on.
M-x help-trouble-shooting-faqs, anyone?
>> May I humbly suggest that we remove
"deprecated"
Here I think "unsupported" is preferred. The DTDs in the package are
perfectly good AFAIK, they just are not updated to newer versions.
OTOH, because the SGML world is pretty persnickety about versioning,
the old versions don't change.
But the conclusion of the discussion that led to the psgml-dtds split
was that the package (not the DTDs necessarily) is deprecated, and will
be removed later. Hence, I think "deprecated" captures the spirit
better than "unsupported".
--
\/ille Skyttä
ville.skytta at
xemacs.org