RE: [htdig-dev] Status of defaults.xml

2002-10-17 Thread Gabriele Bartolini
Ciao Brian, Analysis: * description is the one that will always need it Right. * I think the values for block and category should be considered as 'keys' rather than the actual values - they should be translated by lookup table. I agree. Keys are better and, whenever

Re: [htdig-dev] Status of defaults.xml

2002-10-16 Thread Geoff Hutchison
On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 02:27 AM, Brian White wrote: * 95% of htdocs/attrs.html I guess I'm not clear on what 95% means. Does this refer to the markup that you mentioned before? I still need to bundle up the changes - I was thinking of creating a patch based on 3.2.0b4 and

RE: [htdig-dev] Status of defaults.xml

2002-10-16 Thread Gabriele Bartolini
Well, it is close to ready - I now have it successfully generating Well, first and foremost, it is the first time I express my opinion regarding this solution and I think it is really efficient and intelligent. Good on ya, mate Brian! :-) Having said this, and also taking aknowledgement that I

RE: [htdig-dev] Status of defaults.xml

2002-10-16 Thread Brian White
At 23:25 16/10/2002, Gabriele Bartolini wrote: Well, it is close to ready - I now have it successfully generating Well, first and foremost, it is the first time I express my opinion regarding this solution and I think it is really efficient and intelligent. Good on ya, mate Brian! :-) Having

Re: [htdig-dev] Status of defaults.xml

2002-10-16 Thread Geoff Hutchison
On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 07:41 PM, Brian White wrote: I can use that tool to take a merged version of defaults.cc to produce a version of defaults.xml. The problem is that a few of the descriptions will need to be reworked quite heavily by hand to produce valid XML. OK, that