On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:04:32 +0200
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
>
> > Just one question: Why should xmlcfg allow, what xml does not?
> > I mean, I see the gain to allow numbers as identifiers, but OTOH a
> > newbie could be mislead, that his paths are the xml paths (e.g. '1' vs
> > '_1'). When the configs are read by other applications the paths are
> > different. Maybe we can add a boolean property to TXMLConfig, whether
> > to raise an exception or to automatically convert illegal paths?
> > Then again, what should be the default for the property?
>
> Hmm! I just got a new idea! (which is _so_ apparent, that I really don't
> know why I didn't think about it earlier. See second thought below)...
>
> I should add two new properties:
>
> - one for enabling the conversion stuff. (Rationale: when I wrote the
> first version of xmlcfg, it was planned as a cross-platform replacement
> for TRegistry and similar components, in the long term. And TRegistry
> doesn't has such restrictions. Additionally, a newbie doesn't really
> care about XML and its restrictions.)
>
> - A property which specifies the document root element name. Using this
> property you could read and write lots of existing XML files using the
> simple xmlcfg methods.
> (Personal reminder for me: Finally add namespace support. More and more
> existing XML files are using them.)
>
>
> Any further comments? :-)
I'm satisfied. :)
Mattias
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
