[XML-SIG] DTD for recipes

[Fred L. Drake]

Lars Marius Garshol writes:
 >  - Metadata in general: I think the DTD should in fact hard-wire
 >  optional elements for what we can usefully standardize (possibly in a
 >  separate metadata section), and then allow for extensibility, either
 >  through generic property name/value (and maybe values) sets or
 >  possibly ANY content models. (Possibly both.)

Lars,
  This sounds familliar!  We had a lot of discussion on the metadata
issue for XBEL, and came up with a solution I still think is a little
messy.
  As for ANY: isn't that just a little wide-open?  I'd imagine that
namespaces would be used for metadata, and then validation is out the
door anyway until someone comes up with an accepted standard for
validating documents which use namespaces.  (It would be nice to have
a way to specify "element content", or "element content, but not from 
this DTD".)

 >  - Also, alternatives for ingredients would also be nice, as would
 >  some way of referring to the alternative from the steps, so that
 >  presentation software can choose the correct alternative

  Alternatives should be able to include comments to indicate *why* an 
alternate might be preferable for either dietary reasons (which could
also be done through your nutritional database) or non-dietary reasons 
("This pasta could be used instead of spaghetti when feeding children, 
because they like the exploding dinosaurs.")


  -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.	     <fdrake@acm.org>
Corporation for National Research Initiatives