> Sounds good. But can these XML files contain all the functionality needed > (or links to the files that contain the functionality needed)? What I mean > is this... can the XML files contain links to the other files (like .js > files)?
I think so. Currently our search XML files typically only have one <script /> tag, but they can have more than one. So, there's no reason someone couldn't use: <script src="extensions\googlespell\googlespell.js"></script> (or something like that... not sure about the path) > And does that mean all functionality for things like calendar, > calculator, snippets, etc... are removed from dqsdtools.dll and/or > search.htm and move into .js files in the subdirectory? Everything in dqsdtools.dll is generic (or should be), and isn't associated with any one search. But the features you mentioned are certainly candidates for extensions at some point. I'd suggest leaving them as is if/until we come up with some solid scheme and it works for a few simple extensions. A minor question... I keep waffling between 'extensions' and 'packages' because of my Unix and Emacs influence in my earlier days. Anyone prefer using 'packages' instead of 'extensions' (if we add this feature)? [Dave, are you listening?] Glenn _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Dqsd-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dqsd-users http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8601
