Re: XML Property List code in GNUstep Base

[Stefan Bidigaray]

That's what I figured it was.  I'm going to change to code in CoreBase to reflect these changes, too.  Thanks

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 14 Jul 2015, at 16:47, Stefan Bidigaray <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone with the right credentials had seen this e-mail?  I would gladly make the changes, but I don't know how to add new files to the website.  To me, the solution seems pretty simple: (1) add "plist-1.0.dtd" (or whatever) to the gnustep.org website, (2) modify the code to point to it, (3) modify the plist version attribute to "1.0".  The only thing I can do without introducing introducing the new file is correct the file name from plist-0_9.xml to plist-0_9.dtd.  I don't feel comfortable bumping the version number without also introducing the new dtd file.
>
> Regards
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Stefan Bidigaray <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 8:40 PM
> Subject: XML Property List code in GNUstep Base
> To: GNUstep Developer <address@hidden>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
> I'm working on the CFPropertyList implementation in CoreBase and been checking some of the code in NSPropertyList.m to compare against my own assumptions.
>
> The code in NSPropertyList.m writes the following in the header:
> <!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//GNUstep//DTD plist 0.9//EN" "http://www.gnustep.org/plist-0_9.xml>
> I see 2 problem here:
>
> 1. First, http://www.gnustep.org/plist-0_9.xml does not exist, http://www.gnustep.org/plist-0_9.dtd does, though.  Seems like a simple oversight, but it should still be fixed.
>
> 2. Why is GNUstep using plist version 0.9?  Every example I've gotten from a friend's Mac uses plist version 1.0.  I compared Apple DTD (http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd) against our own and they contain the same exact information.

I missed that … I guess I can change it.

The answer to the question about why we are using 0.9 is that, at the point when we implemented it, Apple was using 0.9 too, and I guess nobody noticed when they changed at some point.