Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pcgen-xml] Re: Propuesta...

Expand Messages
  • Ysgarran
    Back a ways when one of the programmers went into PCGen and put in a I did not read the LST files myself, what I did is put hooks into the persistence layer.
    Message 1 of 6 , Sep 29, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Back a ways when one of the programmers went into PCGen and put in a
      I did not read the LST files myself, what I did is put hooks into the
      persistence layer.  That code would take the PCGen internal
      representation and write it back out into an XML format.  What do you
      think, would it be usefull to go back down that path or not? 
          
      Not terribly, I think.  It was decided a long time (*long* time -- about
      three years ago) that simply changing the syntax from not-XML-LST to
      XML-LST just makes the data more verbose without adding much benefit,
      and that it would be better to actually model the data rather than the
      LST files.
        
      Just to be clear on a point.  The result was not just a translation from a LST to a XML file.   Since the XML
      I was emitting was based on the internal PCGen data model the resulting XML did not look like the
      corresponding LST file.  Now, whether that internal PCGen data model is a good direction to the XML
      is a different question.  
      I was impressed with what Frugal did with the XML based character generator 0.1, even though I did not
      grok everything he was doing with it.  From a gut level, that seems to be the best direction for the PCGen XML.

      Ysgarran.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.