Re: [Widgets] Brief feedback

[Ed Voas]

Michael(tm) Smith wrote: Marcos Caceres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2006-11-13 12:43 +1000: I'm also with Ed on this one. I think the more generic 'manifest.xml' name makes more sense in this context, as a lot of the actual data in the manifest is not used to directly "configure" the application in any significant way... but then again, it all depends on the definition of "configuration". And it would alse depend on the definition of "manifest"... In my experience with software at least, a manifest used to be just a simple list of files (sometimes an annotated list) for the application, project, package, etc. that it shipped with -- not a file containing other metadata. Most manifest files I see are still of that type. I know manifest files for Java apps have other metadata, but they seem to me to be the exception, not the rule. So I wonder if, given that the file actually contains metadata, it might not be better to name it "metadata.xml" or "meta.xml". , a certain type of logical fallacy related to circular reasoning). Hmm, yeah that's true. I had considered metadata.xml. Of course, we could go Apple-like and name it Info.xml. -- Ed