tanner at gmx.de
Wed Nov 25 12:12:57 PST 1998
> I propose (or reiterate, if it's already been proposed) that relatively
> complex, and especially new configuration files be XML-compatible (that is,
> could be parsed by an XML-parser given a proper DTD). My reasoning is this:
> doing so would link the myriad of different formats used in system
> configuration into a single format whose only difference is in the element types
> used. This would greatly simplify the administrator's work (in that he/she
> doesn't have to learn obscure formats) and also provides for the developer
> a coherent means of configuration. It also provides the opportunity for
> a configuration tool which, given the appropriate DTD, can handle configurations
> for basically any application making use of XML-based configuration.
I agree with you that a standard configuration file format is a good thing,
but I'd rather suggest to use the GNUstep/OPENSTEP property list format.
It's extremely easy to understand and can be read and modified
using the very simple and small libproplist (libproplist is part of
XML is IMHO too much overhead for configuration files.
Another solution could be to specify a configuration file access API,
which could read/write in XML/libproplist or whatever you want.
Thomas Tanner -----------------------------
email: tanner at gmx.de tanner at ggi-project.org
visit: www.ggi-project.org www.gnustep.org
More information about the lsb-discuss