On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Andre Lorbach wrote: > I meant this: > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > <param id="listen">10514</param> > <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> > </input> > > Looks more readable to me as > <params > listen="10514" > ruleset="remote10514" > /> > > Also another advantage is if you have parameters that contain linefeeds like > message templates: > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > <param id="listen">10514</param> > <param id="template">$foo > > $bar</param> > </input>
two things. 1. please no 'hidden' linefeeds. I much prefer seeing them explictly specified with \n 2. I really don't like the <generic type=specific> approach, it makes it hard for a parser to enforce the proper application syntax because it's so easy for things that won't make sense to the application to exist. David Lang > Regards, > Andre Lorbach > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards >> Sent: Montag, 21. Juni 2010 15:10 >> To: rsyslog-users >> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format -- XML? >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Andre Lorbach >>> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 2:57 PM >>> To: rsyslog-users >>> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format -- >>> XML? >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> the only argument against XML I can think of is, that syntax error's >>> might happen more often. >>> But if you see XML as an advanced configuration language, this would >>> be fine. >>> >>> >>> Besides that I would allow and support multiple methods to express the >>> parameters like in this sample: >>> <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> >>> <params listen="10514"> >>> <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> >>> </params> >>> </input> >>> >>> For having only a few parameters, it is fine to have the parameters as >>> XML-Node properties, but if you have more than a few parameters, the >>> view is more readable if each parameter has its own XML-Node. >> >> I think you mean this: >> >> <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> >> <params> >> <param id="listen">10514</param> >> <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> >> </params> >> </input> >> >> But what's the advantage of this over >> >> <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> >> <params >> listen="10514" >> ruleset="remote10514" >> /> >> </input> >> >> I have to admit that I do not see an advantage, just more text to be > written >> (and IMHO harder to read due to more noise). So I personally prefer the >> paramter approach. Also I don't see why it should become less readable if >> there are many parameters. Isn't that just a matter of how you format the >> source text? >> >> Maybe I am overlooking something obvious. I don't have much experience >> with XML... >> >> Rainer >> _______________________________________________ >> rsyslog mailing list >> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog >> http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
