Re: gnome-config problems

[Jason Gilbert <jason scott net>]

Olof Oberg wrote:
> 
> No need to write
> 
> <applet>
> <param name="foo" value="bar">
> </applet>
> 
> when
> 
> <applet>
> <param name="foo" value="bar"/>
> </applet>
> 
> is more obvios for the parser, but then
> 
> (applet
>         (param foo bar)
> )

However, the one added advantage that HTML/XML/whatever appears to have
over scheme (I don't know alot about scheme) is that it includes the
names of options in the config file.

like:

<applet name="Menu" width=100 height=100 xpos=5>
  <param name="datadir" value="/home/jason/menu">
</applet>

I would assume that in scheme it would look like:

(applet "Menu" 100 100 5 (param "datadir" "/home/jason/menu"))

If you're editing by hand, which we all know many people do, I think
the former is clearer. You actually know what the parameters are.

I wouldn't think parsing the HTML would be that big of an issue since
we have numerous examples of HTML parses.  Hey, XmHTML is right their.

I agree that it would have to be possible to add new "tags" per
application
if desired.  We would be extending HTML or whatever for internal use so
I really don't think the W3C is an issue.  Only if we tried to take over
the world w/ or HTMLconfig;^)  We WILL take over the world, but I don't
think
or hope that is the way.

jason

-- 
Jason Gilbert | http://www.scott.net/~jason/ | http://www.mantissa.com/

"The total job will be in the software, and we'll be able to write big
fat programs. We can let them run somewhat inefficiently because there
will be so much horsepower that just sits there. The real focus won't
be who can cram it down in, or who can do it in machine language. It
will be on who can define the right user interface and properly
integrate the main packages." -- Bill Gates, PC Magazine 1982