• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: pkmkdoc spec available?


  • Subject: Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
  • From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 02:29:02 -0700

On Oct 4, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Bill Coderre wrote:

I'd love to have a publicly available spec for this...


The official answer will probably be that you can file a bug report on this requesting the format to be made available publicly.


I will save you some time: I filed a enhancement request for that more than 3 years ago regarding the format of PackageMaker documents. I think the answer at one point was something equivalent to: which word don't you understand in 'proprietary format'?


So your best option is to document it yourself.


Why not document the formats of installer PACKAGES themselves?
1) Installer packages are much less buggy
2) They are a lot more likely to be supported in a few years...

Seriously, a bundle package contains a pretty small number of things to document, and it's easily constructed using common unix tools.

Sheesh, mkbom even has a pretty good man page...

I recommend moving to the professional level of an XML Schema description <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/> for describing package formats since it is the international standard. This would bring the benefit of stability for both users and developers since the validation features can help to locate bugs before they make it into release versions while the structural description can provide a means to interface the format with tools, applications, and documentation facilities easily. In addition it has versioning capabilities so it can handle future needs without the development team having to get their shorts tied in a knot at every upgrade (or suffer the barbs of this list!).


You are right that packages don't have a large number of components. Compared to the needs of CSISC <http://www.cdisc.org/models/odm/v1.3/index.html > or the Data Standards Secretariat <http://www.dss-snd.gc.ca/public_MainPage_e.htm > [1] what is being dealt here with seems absolutely puny. Yet these organizations deal effectively with complex documents in multiple output formats using multiple tool/application interfaces (on multiple platforms). That is the power of XML Schema.


[1] Various documents including taxonomy and element descriptions available after you sign a download agreement.



Philip Aker echo email@hidden@nl | tr a-z@. p-za-o.@

Democracy: Two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


References: 
 >pkmkdoc spec available? (From: Bill Janssen <email@hidden>)
 >Re: pkmkdoc spec available? (From: Nigel Kersten <email@hidden>)
 >Re: pkmkdoc spec available? (From: Iceberg-Dev <email@hidden>)
 >Re: pkmkdoc spec available? (From: Bill Coderre <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
  • Next by Date: Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
  • Previous by thread: Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
  • Next by thread: Re: pkmkdoc spec available?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread