Arthus Erea wrote: > Owen, I understand that you want to make a clear format. > > However, I feel like you are making it unnecessarily complicated for > themers. The whole idea of allowing this XML is to make it simpler, > not more complicated.
Yes, producing one static, documented format that doesn't change is more clear, more simple, than having the file behave in completely different ways based on the value assigned to a type attribute of the XML's first node. That's the basis of my entire thesis -- there's no reason to even debate your additional points. The alternative to a generic format produces at least two documents, each including its own differences in how things work. This also produces much more conditional code, which needs to be maintained. None of this maintenance and complication of documentation is of benefit to anyone. Moreover, this is a first draft, which will also have a first implementation. I think it will be better to refine from something generic to something specific than vice-versa. If it turns out that themers are befuddled by what you perceive as complication, then we can make adjustments before release or for the next release. It would be wise to have actual experimental data to review before making those kinds of assumptions. Owen --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
