This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
BeerXML article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 11 February 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BeerXML has become circular with four contributors, 2 in favour of deletion and 2 against and no consensus. This RFC is for other contributors to discuss whether the page meets the criteria for deletion on the grounds of lack of notability. Devils In Skirts! ( talk) 18:49, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
"The result was keep. A good example of why nominating articles for deletion when they are less than an hour old is poor form." Stifle — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrivateWiddle ( talk • contribs) 23:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Looking over the standard at BeerXML An XML Standard for Beer Brewing Data Version 1.0, it seems that the structure of a BeerXMl doc is an XML header along with one of several Record Sets: RECIPES, HOPS, etc. But the XML standard specifies that there should be a unique root element. While each BeerXML document may have a single root element, across documents there is not a unique root element. This BeerXML schema seems to have "beer_xml" as a root element, but that seems contradictory to the BeerXML standard. How is this resolved in practice? Is there a ref? Thanks, -- Mark viking ( talk) 20:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
<RECIPES>...</RECIPES>
and <HOPS>...</HOPS>
in the same document. This seems to have been realised in later (and completely incompatible) versions of the BeerXML spec where they invent the <beer_xml>...</beer_xml>
overall container.This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
BeerXML article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 11 February 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BeerXML has become circular with four contributors, 2 in favour of deletion and 2 against and no consensus. This RFC is for other contributors to discuss whether the page meets the criteria for deletion on the grounds of lack of notability. Devils In Skirts! ( talk) 18:49, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
"The result was keep. A good example of why nominating articles for deletion when they are less than an hour old is poor form." Stifle — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrivateWiddle ( talk • contribs) 23:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Looking over the standard at BeerXML An XML Standard for Beer Brewing Data Version 1.0, it seems that the structure of a BeerXMl doc is an XML header along with one of several Record Sets: RECIPES, HOPS, etc. But the XML standard specifies that there should be a unique root element. While each BeerXML document may have a single root element, across documents there is not a unique root element. This BeerXML schema seems to have "beer_xml" as a root element, but that seems contradictory to the BeerXML standard. How is this resolved in practice? Is there a ref? Thanks, -- Mark viking ( talk) 20:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
<RECIPES>...</RECIPES>
and <HOPS>...</HOPS>
in the same document. This seems to have been realised in later (and completely incompatible) versions of the BeerXML spec where they invent the <beer_xml>...</beer_xml>
overall container.