Ah yes, that would be helpful, wouldn't it? I thought I'd said that, but I think I changed my message halfway through and dropped that part. ;)
The converter will be completely general. From one MIME-Type to another (plus an added system for subtypes that are pluggable, since subtypes may vary by MIME-Type or so goes my current thoughts). It will take input from a scalar, a file handle, a file and will be able to output a scalar, a file handle, or a file. Input and output could be any binary or text format and the conversion could be anything. I'm just creating a generalized converter API, without respect to the actual conversions.
My primary interest is the ability to convert XML files to HTML using configurable conversion methods (XSL, XSP, Petal, custom Perl code, etc.). However, I figure that there's no reason to make the system this specific since I've also considered the usefulness of tools for converting image files between formats, between printable document formats, or whatever.
Therefore, "Text::" probably isn't appropriate. Since the input doesn't need to be a file, I wouldn't think "File::" would be appropriate either.
Thanks! Sterling
Ken Y. Clark wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 12:03:06PM -0500, Andrew Sterling Hanenkamp wrote:
I'm currently putting together a group of modules which would transform file data in one format to data in another format. It will use plugin modules to allow for custom configuration and automate the process. I can't really think of a really great name for this module. The best names I've been able to come up with are:
Data::Transformation Data::Convert
I don't know if Data:: is appropriate, since it normally refers to Perl data structures. Besides the main name, the module would include a number of plugins that would be under the primary namespace.
Any suggestions?
Cheers,
Sterling
Is the "file data" just plain text? If so, maybe the "Text::" namespace. Tell us more about what formats are being transmogrified from and to.
ky
-- <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> <>< ><> Andrew Sterling Hanenkamp http://Andrew.Sterling.Hanenkamp.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no
virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring"
and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable
programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with
other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in
supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own
money -- if a gun is held to his head.
-- P.J. O'Rourke