libSpiff issues, plans for the not-too-far future

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

libSpiff issues, plans for the not-too-far future

Sebastian Pipping
Hello!


-- Introduction
Mails about foo_xspf with Clemens Terasa of foo_xspf
brought up the question whether xml:base can hold
relative URIs or not.  I've been talking to several
people about it since then.  The most helpful reply
came from Frans Englich.
Now it is clear to me that I mis-implemented support for
xml:base introduced in libSpiff 0.8.4.


-- Details and consequences
xml:base can not only hold relative URIs, it can also
appear in stacked manner:

  <foo xml:base="/one/">
    <bar xml:base="two/">
      some_uri
    </bar>
  </foo>

So this is quite a bit away from my previous understanding
of an always absolute URI only appearing in root elements ..
From my current point of view this means xml:base support
in libSpiff will be not only change, but also in a backwards-
incompatible way.  But maybe there is value in this as well.


-- Not-too-far future of libSpiff
Let me use bullet style here ..

 - Fixing xml:base support will (and in SVN trunk already did)
   break both source and binary compatibility.

 - In the past spiff_c would have needed an binary compatibility
   breaking extension for the OpenMoko media player.  They have
   a modified version of spiff_c in their repository.
   This could be the right time to make spiff_c more powerful.

 - In Free Software many projects including mine make the mistake
   to see the development process as a journey towards 1.0.
   As libSpiff is quite feature complete by now the next release
   is planned to be libSpiff 1.0.

 - I am aware that libSpiff's "API usability" could be better.
   I think it was worth the trade for flexibility to some extent,
   though.  Nevertheless: If you have been working with libSpiff
   and got bit by something repeatedly now is a good point in time
   to speak up or send patches. Thank you!



Sebastian

_______________________________________________
Playlist mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/playlist
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: libSpiff issues, plans for the not-too-far future

Sebastian Pipping
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Now it is clear to me that I mis-implemented support for
> xml:base introduced in libSpiff 0.8.4.

I forgot to mention this affects the online validator as well.
I'm still at fixing libSpiff .. but the online validator should
do it right now.

https://trac.xiph.org/changeset/15199



Sebastian


_______________________________________________
Playlist mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/playlist
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: libSpiff issues, plans for the not-too-far future

Sebastian Pipping
In reply to this post by Sebastian Pipping
The xml:base support re-write is mainly done by now.
However libSpiff is not ready for a new release with
more than "alpha quality" yet.

I'm unsure how to proceed the release process from
here. Would an early alpha help? Should I wait a little
more and do a release candidate?

Thanks for any guidance,



Sebastian


_______________________________________________
Playlist mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/playlist
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: libSpiff issues, plans for the not-too-far future

Saoshyant
On 8/26/08, Sebastian Pipping <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Should I wait a little more and do a release candidate?

Yes.

-Ivo

_______________________________________________
Playlist mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/playlist