On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 17:06 +0100, Winfried Donkers wrote:
> >What do you mean with "The current format does not look efficient to
> >me." Efficient in terms of what?
>
> Just that the file size caused by the xml-tags exceeds the file size
> caused by the data itself. I have nothing against xml and I am no expert.
> For me there is no need to change it, it's purely that if there is a
> preference to change the format, now is a good time.
Heh - well, I've nothing against re-using the format, parsing it etc.
there are real costs to new formats whenever they are used.
I would just ignore my rather vague (and unrelated) worries wrt.
performance - and get your changes in (they sound great). Later we'll
need to re-work the configmgr code / parser to cope with different
hierarchies separately (or something). IMHO there is no need for some
layering scheme for label dimensions eg. ;-) It's work for the future.
HTH,
Michael.
--
michael.me...@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
