At 4:03 AM -0600 11/27/98, Voglmaier, Reinhard Erich wrote: >> While this is probably fine to some degree, all the projects will have >> problems supporting different versions of Apache (that is, if a directive >> changes name, the GUI program will have to updates its definition for that >> directive), and probably more importantly, supporting varying versions of >> different dynamically loaded modules could get tricky.
Actually, this might be relatively easy to handle if Apache moves to a fully object-oriented specification. For instance, if each directive was defined as a component of a larger directive, and its type and valid range were specified (and maybe a couple other things), an application such as a GUI could parse the data definition and autogenerate the necessary forms. data definition... hmmm. I wonder if XML might be a useful tool here... What if (a version of) the configuration files were specified as an XML DTD? Advantages are, text oriented, (increasingly) widely available, well structured, extensible, few standardization conflicts (yet, anyway) GEB Gary E. Bickford, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Systems Administrator, Connect Schlumberger http://www.connect.slb.com
