>
>
> > How about recasting all of the config files in XML/XHMTL and use standard
> > visual editors for this information? Surely, the "home" page would be a
> > natural for this.
>
> I've sort of been developing a schema for this for PODS, see the
> sitescooper archives for some of the ideas I've begun to implement. Here's a
> snippet of one of the examples:
>
> <PODS>
> <SITE TITLE="TrekToday - the first and only
> daily updated guide to all things Trek." DOMAIN="trektoday.com"
> PROTECTED="no" ROOTPAGE="headline_15_blank.txt" PROTOCOL="http">
> </SITE>
> <SERVER>
> <ADDRESS>208.231.7.186</ADDRESS>
> <TYPE>apache</TYPE>
> <VERSION>1.3.9</VERSION>
> </SERVER>
> <URI>
> http://www.trektoday.com/headlines/headline_15_blank.txt
> </URI>
> </PODS>
>
> Obviously this would require a bit of smarts on the part of the
> current python parser, but I'm sure there are some modules out there that can
> handle it natively, extracting the elements and all.
>
> > If there is a concern that XML editors are potentially overly complicated
> > and immature, you could go with just HTML (or XHTML).
>
> vi is the best XML editor I've seen yet.
>
I agree, but we were talking about visual configuration for newbies.
Using something like XML or HTML would allow users like yourself as
much power as they like but also open up the configuration to all sorts
of easy-to-use options.
> > One issue might be that the extra information in <A ...> tags like
> > STAYBELOW and STAYONHOST, etc. would not be maintained correctly by all
> > HTML editors.
>
> Not true if you use them as attributes:
>
> <DEPTH maxdepth="3" />
>
> > Has anyone ever thought to move those extra fields out to HTML comments
> > between the <A> and the </A>?
>
> What extra fields?
>
The STAYBELOW/STAYONHOST are extra fields in HTML and may not be handled
by all HTML editors well. Of course, in XML, it's just a matter of your
DTD definition.
>
>
> /d
>
>
-Jordan Henderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
