RE: [pcgen-xml] Expanded pcg proposal
- Sounds good to me.
Brass Tilde wrote:
well, a number of reasons:
1) It'll be a lot easier for people to write code against it, because
vast chunks of our file format have a full spec as well as sample code
what this means is that for the files that are exactly the same
(Manifest.xml, settings.xml, mimetype, meta.xml), we have an example
implementation, and a ton of doco for other people to use.
2) It means we have to do less work to define specific files
Just getting the built-in editors to work well has been an effort for a number of years now. I think that, if the code team were
to focus solely on the editors, they'd work on getting just the flat-file stuff working first before going towards the zipped
Paul W. King
OGL/PL/TM Chimp, Data Gibbon
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Edwin Holley
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 7:05 PM
Subject: RE: [pcgen-xml] Re: Expanded pcg proposal
Ok ... what about an editor for the data sets, which could support the zipped or unzipped data sets automatically.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/130 - Release Date: 10/12/2005