.properties files are a standard in the Java world (and tightly bound to
the way it handles i18n and l10n) , so using them here makes sense as well,
especially if you forsee eventually converting any of your system to Java.
For the XML config, WDDX or straight CF might be a little easier up front, but
XML provides three big benefits over either approach:
1)
validation against a DTD/Schema to help you find nasty little bugs in structure
in huge config files.
2)
with a DTD/Schema you have a whole range of editing tools that'll help you edit
your config file and make sure you don't screw up.
3) a
portable format, so anything can read it
---
Barney Boisvert, Senior Development
Engineer
AudienceCentral (formerly PIER System,
Inc.)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
voice : 360.671.8708
x12
fax : 360.647.5351
www.audiencecentral.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Todd
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 12:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] MVCF at benorama.com
At 03:16 PM 3/25/2003 -0500, "Davis, Eric" wrote:
3) Speaking of the appConfig file, what drives you to use XML for the app config, and the .properties format for the i18n data? Would it not be just as easy, if not easier and faster to simply create structures in cfscript, or even with cf tags?
or even easier, a WDDX packet.
~Todd
