Niklas Peinecke writes:
Nico wrote:
Personally I don't understand the passion for XML;
I do; You can use many standard transformation tools for XML, those tools can parse-and-generate something else, including your samba format, but you can't get back from samba to xml. It's called XSLT (eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformation). Believe me, it's short to code, powerful and saves lots of effort and energy.
don't you believe that a structure like the one following (intended as an example, not as a proposal) is easier?
It's nice, but
[source] name=hotbird type=SAT diseqc_protocol=1.0 lnb=1 card=1 [mux] name=rai source=hotbird frequency=11766 polarization=v
[programs] name=rai1 mux=rai vpid=160 apid=80 .....
If you want to parse this very clean you end up just with the same SAX like interface you would have with a XML solution.
But above you can't parse with sax, nor can you apply xsl transformation unless (I Propose this) you rewrite it minimally to comply with XML, thus I think the correct universally parseable format would be this: <source name="hotbird" type="SAT" diseqc_protocol="1.0" lnb="1" card="1" /> <mux name="rai" source="hotbird" frequency="11766" polarization="v" /> <programs name="rai1" mux="rai" vpid="160" apid="80" ..... /> Emard
Well done, IMO this shows clearly, that XML doesn't need to look like the mess that WORD (ugh!) produces. Please note that XML 1.0 demands to have exactly _one_ root element, so it should read:
<sat> [...your text...] </sat>
Niklas
-- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
