On 30/08/15 18:30, Martin Holmes wrote:
My objection, BTW, is *not* with using XSLT instead of Perl. My objection, a minor one at that, is with performing the hack on the input PureODD rather than on the output DTD. But that objection is not a show-stopper, it's just a misgiving.
The resulting file would be transient and deleted at the end of the process; it would just be part of a processing chain.
I missed this suggestion earlier. Can you elaborate on what you mean? Are you suggesting that we post-process p5.xml to introduce <sequence> elements round every <classRef> and then use that version to drive dtd generation? and then throw it away? I believe that sounds like what Baldrick would call a very Cunning Plan, but the devil is in the details...