At 02:39 PM 6/27/2005 -0700, John Anderson wrote:
We need to remembert that we're also building a framework, not just
Chandler the application. It's important for some applications you might
build out of the framework (or even for some Chandler parcels) to easily
create any schema and instances, not just U/I centric schemas and
instances, even though Chandler's schema is currently dominated by schema
U/I. Besides, the best way to create instances in U/I isn't with parcel
XML or even a custom U/I centric XML, it's through direct maniplation in
the application itself.
So, I think it's a big mistake to make creation of instances and schema
tied to any one particular domain, U/I or something else. We can certainly
come up with a reasonable syntax that's not domain specific -- after all
programming languages have been doing that for years. Then let's
concentrate on putting U/I instance creation in the application, like
Interface Builder and all the other GUI builders.
This is one of the reasons that I said this:
But, these would be evolutionary changes rather than revolutionary, at
least with respect to the parcel loader. Honestly, unless somebody just
puts together some really smashing idea for a GUI-specific XML syntax
(and soon!), I think that minor improvements to the loader and the schema
will be fine for getting us through 0.7 at the very least.
My comments about how much of Chandler's current parcel.xml does what, was
more to indicate that I don't think there's really a need for a dramatic
improvement to the current format, because 3/4ths of all parcels currently
contain less than 100 lines of XML, and that's really not too bad. Even
the worst XML format can probably be endured for 100 lines. :)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
