RE: config library. Was GNOME registry

Well, I think the base library should contain wrappers to the modules. XML
is verry new. A XML module should be created, but we dont want to rely
entirely on XML. Who is to say that in a month or so, there isn't a new
technology that blows XML out of the water. Implamenting it in this
fassion allows for choice by the user and future improvements later with
out the main program needing rewriting.

On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Rowan van der Molen wrote:

> At 12:35 1-01-99 -0800, you wrote:
> >I have put up a page.
> ><>
> >
> >On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Rowan van der Molen wrote:
> >
> >> At 17:40 1-01-99 +0100, you wrote:
> >> >At 09:20 31.12.98 -0800, you wrote:
> >> >>I think you misunderstand. Thats what I tryed to say.
> >> >>
> >> >>The only reason the actual file exists on the hard drive is so the
> library
> >> >>can tell what method of saving the config data. The program dosnt do it.
> The
> >> >>library does. PAM does the same thing.
> >> >>
> >> >>The program should have no idea what form the data is being saved in,
> just
> >> >>that it is actually being saved.
> >> >
> >> >I think that would be the best solution. But the problem is that most
> (all)
> >> >of the programs would have to be converted to use the library. If only few
> >> >programs used the central registry, it wouldn't be of much use. Therefore
> >> >the API should make the conversion easy. Unfortunately I have no idea how
> >> >this could be done because every config file has it's own format.
> >> >Such a library would be wonderful if all programs used it. It is very
> >> >important that the library should offer the possibility to store the data
> >> >in text files (maybe with an appropriate directory structure).
> >> At this point my little XML idea might come in handy or won't it?
> >> 
> >I find the XML idea a good idea. I do alot of html coding, so it would be
> >nice to use tags. :)
> Ok, I'll explain my idea some further
> I think that you might very easily make a program which puts a nice lay-out
> on your screen in which you can change your XML config files which can
> than be converted to the appropriate plain text config files through XSL or
> made
> available through a nice CORBA or library api.
> If we use XML for our config files it might be very easy to make a nice
> configuration
> manager by just making it an XML/XSL frond-end. 
> That would mean that you don't have to bother how the config program is put 
> on the screen of the end-user. You could make that extremely configurable
> through
> XSL or something alike. Even better: you can very easilly make a console
> program
> as well with a special set of stylesheet rules.
> I think that you simply can't program a GUI configuration program for every
> single
> program which appears and even if you would succeed with that, it would be
> outdated 
> and old-fashioned before it's even downloaded.
> Instead of that you can simply declare the rules for writing config files for
> the program 
> and the program (XSL processor) can wirte the config files for you. 
> This way you could even go so far that the end-user doesn't even need to know
> what 
> programs he's running under the shell of his beautifull configuration
> program. 
> He sets the background and the background changes but he doesn't even need to
> know
> what WM he's running because the program writes the appropriate config file
> for
> it ;-)
> I like abstraction
> -- 
>         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at
>          To unsubscribe: mail with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]