[XML-SIG] Roadmap document - finally!

Martin v. Loewis martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de
Sat, 17 Feb 2001 18:48:38 +0100

> We would benefit from a good test suite that is easy to run, self-evaluates
> the results, contains plenty of regression tests, and makes it easy to add
> tests.  Although I know that no one (including me) wants to spend time on
> this, once it's accomplished, we should be able to improve the quality of the
> results while spending less effort on testing and bug fixing.

I'd like to point out that PyXML already has such a thing. I run it
regularly before building releases, and won't produce a release that
has new test failures. Of course, additions to this test suite are

> I suggest we look at using pyUnit for this.  I only looked at it for
> a few minutes, but it looks promising.  It might make sense to use
> the OASIS parser test cases as a part of the test suite.

Currently, the PyXML test suite uses regrtest for many tests; 4DOM has
its own framework. Could you please say what is wrong with these
frameworks? It seems that we don't really need a new framework; we
need more tests.

Of course, if somebody would contribute additional tests, requiring a
new framework would be acceptable if we can bundle the framework with

> Second, I think the road map should include directions for future work.

I'd avoid maintaining a pure wishlist. Additions to the roadmap should
include commitments of individual contributors to actually contribute;
ideally with a commitment to contribute at a specific time in the
future (which may be well several months from now).

Otherwise, people will think that they will get something soon, only
to find out that they did not get it two years from now.

> Xml Schemas would seem to be a prime candidate.  Is anyone working
> or wanting to work on py-xml-xchemas?  Can we get some of Henry
> Thompson's code?  What about an API for xml schemas? Can we take the
> lead in that? Or do we not want to (or no one is personally
> interested?).  Let's get it into the Roadmap.

These are good questions. Without answers, I'd like to avoid giving
the impression that any work on this is actually done.

E.g. if somebody stands up and offers to define an XML Schema API,
that would be a good thing to add to the roadmap, since it gives
people a contact point, and may keep discussion alive.

> Then there are the non-standards things.  Is pyXml going to do
> anything with RDF? Topic maps? What else?  Into the roadmap, even if
> there is no one to work on such projects at the moment.

Please, no. Maybe I misunderstand the purpose of this document. If so,
can you please explain what its purpose is?

> Finally, let's add some direction for some of the other efforts that keep
> popping up, like miniDOM.  How will it fit into the picture.  We've been
> talking about it recently.  Into the roadmap, I say!

I think the direction of minidom should be best documented in the
minidom documentation. If anybody can provide a specific patch against
the minidom documentation, I'm sure there is interest in discussing
that. When that is documented, it could give a clear guideline for the
maintenance of the package.