On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 02:07:56AM +0000, José Fonseca wrote: >> Do you really want a tool that does not understand complete syntax of the >> configuration file (let alone semantics) messing with Xserver >> configuration ? >> > >The are lot of scenarios were one would want that. Why should a tool for >configurating the desktop size and depth worry about the Z axis mapping of >the mouse?
It doesn't need to know about it, even now, because we have a library for reading/writing the config file. The tool just needs to deal with the data structures that it's interested in. There are legitimate arguments for using XML, but I'm not sure that all of the arguments put forward fall into that category. >Instead of making the XF86config a monster every configuration tool would >had to be a even bigger monster.. Anyway, due to XML easy syntax there are >very tiny XML parsers available, so this is not even an issue. I know that libxml2 isn't the smallest one around, but the code size is about three times that of the parser in XFree86. The difference of course is that libxml2 isn't single-purpose. >For what is worth, I just want to say that IMHO the advantages of using >XML heavily outweight its disadvantages. The number one disadvantage I see is the change, and I know that nobody is advocating making the switch overnight. The basic XFree86 config file format has existed for a LONG time, and XML wasn't available as an option when it was first developed. I'd really like to see a proposed DTD for an XML-based XFree86 config file. David -- David Dawes Senior X Architect Tungsten Graphics, Inc www.XFree86.org/~dawes www.tungstengraphics.com _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
