Yeah - JSON would be great. Generally much more useful than XML. It will be the first cli I've seen to output JSON, but it makes a lot of sense. Simple csv is more common, but won't hack it for html chunks.
On 11 January 2011 20:50, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Ingo Koch <fos...@ikoch.de> wrote: >> >>> I'm working on a C# wrapper library around fossil >>> and I encountered some commands which require user input. >>> >> >> Tell me about these commands when you encounter them and I'll add >> command-line options to work around the user input. > > > My (very) favored option would be an option generate results as JSON, with > a well-specified grammar depending on the operation. JSON can easily be > parsed by most languages and would allow us to AJAXify parts of the Fossil > UI by calling the appropriate JSON-generating function to fetch, e.g., the > timeline data. This would also allow us to create, e.g., PHP-based > front-ends for fossil (at least for the read-only operations), fetching the > data via AJAX calls to a fossil CGI script. > > As far as parsing/portability goes, shell scripts of course can't easily > parse JSON, but perl, python, java, C++, etc., all have good JSON libraries > available. (The C JSON libs i've evaluated haven't excited me all that much, > with the exception of one push-style parser which i really like.) >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
