Lists Home |
Date Index |
> > (I never went as far as XDR, not sure why - I guess that doesn't
> > matter now though...)
> An unconscious instinct for self-preservation, perhaps?
probably, it has been said that knuth and turing look after fools and
small programmers. altough it was probably an immune response triggered
by XDR's source domain versus that of my employer :)
> Could I suggest that you take a look at the construction of Jabber?
> There's an excellent (O'Reilly zoo) book on the subject. In
> particular, the way that Jabber associates a namespace with a module is
> unique in my experience, but might meet your needs quite nicely. It's
> a very different take on the use of namespaces (and it has to be said
> that the distributed code doesn't do a terribly spec-compliant job on
> change the prefix of the root element to anything other than "stream"
> and it barfs all over your shoes). I won't completely recommend it,
> but I think that you ought to look at it, as an inspirational text ....
> Jabber config files address the same problem: independently written
> modules, which may even operate on different machines, but for which
> configuration should be centralized.
OK, time to wade through the XML section at the bookstore again. Wish
that Computer Literacy hand't been assimlated.
> > <!-- I would like to be able to include a file of just test and server
> > elements without a containing <netperf></netperf> -->
> > <xi:include href="sub.xml" />
> Whether inclusion works as planned may depend upon the processor used
> to parse the instance. Check on what's available; you might find (for
> instance) that the tools available in Python supply your needs, and
> that the language is available on all platforms likely to use netperf.
It could simpy be that I don't understand what include is supposed to
do. I'm thinking of it with a C programming mind set - include a
fraction of a program/definitions, but not something that is a complete
program in and of itself. I'm getting the impression that is not quite
what XInclude is about - it seems to be about including an entire
document (its root and all) as a child element (correct term?) of
> > having become totally confused by C++ several times, and wanting more
> > low-level control over sockets than I understand is available in
> > Java, and wanting to use things like libcurl for the FTP and HTTP i
> > would like to stick with C (perhaps that shows my age :) i have come
> > across libxml from the gnome folks - haven't gone quite as far as
> > gdome2 yet though, peeked only a little at SOAP and am not sure I
> > want to go that far just yet.
> Daniel's a regular on this list, so perhaps he'll say something about
> how well libxml2 suits your purposes.
He is the one who redirected me here from the xml list :)
> > using XML as the output format of the benchmark appears appealing -
> > the stuff I wrote to parse netperf2 output for the netperf database
> > was, well, quaint.
> Take a quick look at ant, especially its optional junit task. No, I'm
> not suggesting a unit testing framework, but the junit task generates
That's OK, many folks have (ab)used netperf as a testing tool rather
than a benchmark :)
> XML output, which is then transformed via stylesheet into a really
> lovely tree. Moreover, the XML is still there, for further
> transformation (as accumulation of data, or run comparisons ... just
> another stylesheet).
> > *) i'm not sure when one "should" use attributes versus a nested
> > element
> Controversial. Using DTD-defined XML, the only things that *could*
> have types were attributes. Not true for XSDL-defined, or even
XSDL - XML Schemas?
> > *) my config files may become quite large - XInclude sounds
> > interesting, but a fully formed file XIncluded (at least via
> > libxml) has the whole file as a sub-element when what I really
> > want (I think anyway) is the elements in the file being included
> > be at the same depth as the include itself (ie up one level)
> XLink replace. Or just live with inclusion semantics.
> > *) since I am interested in things like doubles and 64-bit integers
> > and such i think i want to use XML schemas (?) but those seem to
> > be still rather new and not part of libxml - are they part of any
> > other C-based offering.
> May I point out that XML is text?
> So it really doesn't matter. You
> can define it, in your application, as <element type="long-long"> and
> nobody else has to care. Type definition is a seriously painful topic,
> because XML's text representation doesn't really correspond to the
> binary representation of a double or float, even using IEEE 754.
> You're *going* to convert. If you were sending this information around
> to other W3C XML Schema-aware applications, then you'd have a real need
> to use the types defined by W3C XML Schema. Since you're using the
> types where they need to turn into types (XSLT isn't going to perform
> special actions based on types, not this year, anyway), you''ve no
> requirement to conform to the truly limping and incomprehensible
> collection of type collections defined in XSDL. Do it in the
I guess I was hping for some additional checking in the parser rather
than in the code I wrote myself. Laziness on my part.
It sounds then like I should do a basic DTD then if I want some level of
> > *) when someone adds a new test suite, I'd like them to be able to
> > include a validator (schema?) that will be sucked-in to the main
> > config file. however, i'm concerned about what I read about
> > namespaces (which I think I may need/want to avoid name conflicts)
> > and validation, and it seems that the validators have to be all
> > specified at the top of a document?
> So define each test as a separate document. Validate independently.
> Use XLink/XInclude to stitch together; use document() to produce
> aggregated reports via XSLT.
I suppose each discrete test suite in an aggregation of tests could be a
separate config docuement, though I would have "extra" server's defined.
Probably not a big deal though, and it is unlikely that I'll have that
many cases of multiple test quites active in the same benchmark session.
> > i'm sure that my questions show just how little I really understand
> > about all this, so please be gentle :)
> Heh. No, you ask really *nice* questions. Your questions can be
> answered. Given the way that the questions are phrased, I can feel
> confident that an answer that isn't an answer, just a pointer at
> resources for you to find the answer, is still potentially useful.
> "I'm new, could someone explain XML?" is a hard one ....
One must always tread lightly when entering an unfamiliar forrest :)
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...