Relax NG support Follow Casper Ellingsen Created August 17, 2006 21:56 Hi,It seems like IntelliJ IDEA does not have Relax NG support. Is this correct? If so, is this planned for the near future?Best regards,Casper Ellingsen
CE> It seems like IntelliJ IDEA does not have Relax NG support. Is this
CE> correct? If so, is this planned for the near future?
Yes, this is correct, and no, it is not planned for version 6.0.
"Develop with Pleasure!"
RELAX NG is gaining momentum as an important alternative to the overly complex XML Schema. For example: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2006/11/27/Choose-Relax
Please consider adding this to IDEA.
I'd second this - support for Relax NG in IDEA would be good.
RelaxNG is a jewel of simplicity in a mudpool of (increasingly complex) XML
I don't know if there are enough users to make a plugin worthwile, but every
time I use RelaxNG (compact syntax), it's "working with pleasure"...
(XSLT 2.0/XPath 2.0 are not that bad either, but all the XSD/SOAP/WS-* stuff...ick)
I can only agree. XSD is a nightmare to work with, for both reading and writing. I always use RNG if possible. Although I've never touched the compact syntax, which doesn't seem to fit into the XML-world - IMHO.
Please see / vote for http://www.jetbrains.net/jira/browse/IDEA-13734.
The compact syntax is far easier to work with when you're authoring. Once you've tried it, you won't want to go back ;-).
Of course, if IDEA supports the compact syntax as well, then editing it will be even easier.
I voted in favor of this request.
And I'll reiterate the general sentiment that Relax NG is much nicer to work with, especially, as others have mentioned, the compact syntax.
You probably know, but it may still bear mentioning, that the compact syntax and the XML syntax are 100% interconvertible and there's a simple tool, "trang," that performs both transliterations. It can also translate between Relax NG and XSD or DTD in many cases.
Yes, I know about that, it's just that I find the XML syntax more expressive because things like "optional", "zeroOrMore", etc. are just more natural than the single-char operators of the compact syntax. And it somehow reminds me of ugly config files from the last century :).
With an XML editor like IDEA (and an xsd schema for rng), editing the XML is actually really simple.
Anyway, there's a good chance that in the not-too-distant-future it will become even easier ;)
De gustibus non est disputandum...
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool regular expression guy going back to when "ed" was the only editor available on our Unix systems, And that tradition, plus the general ugliness of XML, give me a strong preference for the compact syntax.
But it surely is a matter of taste, and so not usefully debated.
I personally agree with Randall, on matter of taste, background of regex and ugliness of XML.
The only thing I'd add for the compact syntax is to actually give it a go. You might only find out the usefulness of it once you've used it for a while.
Of course, maybe you've already done this...
Also (in addition to "the only thing"...), as well as writing/editing, it's also about reading.
For me, the compact syntax's conciseness (maybe 2 or 3 times less lines than the XML syntax?) and the lack of boilerplate (which the XML syntax definitely has, as for all XML) are definite wins.
The plugin is finally available here: http://plugins.intellij.net/plugin/?id=1783
See also the announcement: http://intellij.net/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=271199&tstart=0
And, unless I'm mistaken, also via the plug-in manager in IDEA.
Thanks! (Though you may be undermining my investment in a an <oXygen/> license...)