Andrew Lentvorski wrote: >.. > XML should be used when you need to read the data once at file open and > write the data once on file close. Surprisingly, that's actually a > *lot* of cases. For example, OpenOffice using XML is *good*. I use XML > as the on-disk format when I write CAD tools until performance starts to > suck. Using XML for configuration files is okay although I really > prefer code in configuration files. Low performance persistence is > okay, too. > > The problem occurs when people try to shoehorn XML into places it should > not be. It should not be used as an active database. It should not be > used to store high-density numerical data for manipulation. However, > all of those should be *exportable* to an XML format. > > My general rule is: if I'm about to write a file to disk that you will > later parse, no matter how "simple" it is--its time for XML. Switching > off of XML falls under the optimizations phase. >
I'd like to hear your opinions on gconf. Not intending to troll.. ..if that question might be considered an _open the flood gates_ invitation, then a brief characterization will be welcomed. :-) Regards, ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
