Shawn, MLL, I see your point, but I'm not sure... DQSD has to do *something* by default, and keeping that something to gg.xml seems reasonable to me. By that line of reasoning, just making gg.xml a required search would make everything sooo much cleaner development-wise.
I don't know, I can't come up with any great arguments at the moment, but I still think gg.xml is the #1 DQSD search, and that it's reasonable to require it... Cheers, Kim > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Shawn K. Hall > Sent: den 17 december 2004 23:23 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [DQSD-Devel] latest search.nsi > > Hi All, > > > I'm not that sure we should consider gg.xml a core search. > > After all, the default search is parametrable IIRC. > > You beat me to it. I agree with this 100%. If someone decides > to dump the google search, let them. However, I think we > ought to have a 'backup list' of searches that are serialized > - if no gg then yahoo search, if not yahoo search then... And > maybe if no other searches exist at all it opens up a Windows > Explorer search on the local system. ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Archive: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dqsd-devel
