On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:22, Ulrich Mayring wrote: > Peter Donald wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Whats everyone think about renaming server.xml to environment.xml ? > > Sounds reasonable to me. > > While we're on the subject of naming, what is *.xinfo supposed to > achieve? Why not give it an XML suffix like all other files? Instead of > myblock.xinfo we could name it myblock-info.xml or even myblock.xml.
no idea. It was just what we decided at the time. I can't see anything wrong with that though. > Then, there is (correct me if I'm wrong) some redundant information > between the *.xinfo and the assembly.xml file. redundent - not that I know of - what are you referring to? > I know that *.xinfo is > for the block and assembly.xml for the .sar application. But it seems to > me that in every .sar application I write, there is kind of an aggregate > of the various *.xinfo files in my assembly.xml. It would be nicer, if > this aggregation of information would be done automatically or not at > all. again - need more context to figure out which part you are referring to. -- Cheers, Pete The big mistake that men make is that when they turn thirteen or fourteen and all of a sudden they've reached puberty, they believe that they like women. Actually, you're just horny. It doesn't mean you like women any more at twenty-one than you did at ten. --Jules Feiffer (cartoonist) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
