On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Ian Romanick wrote:
> D. Hageman wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> >>How do we want to handle the case where a user changes video cards?
> >>Some of the parameters are likely to be generic, but a lot will be very
> >>device specific. The issue here
I think a better approach would be to add a level of indirection between
the app and the card - reason to follow this example:
...
...
...
The advantages this has are:
> >
> > > ...
> >
> >
>
> I'm coming to conclusion more the more I think about it. I really can't
> come up with a good, real-world case to argue for
> application-then-device. Most of the cases where you'd want the
> application at the top level could be handled by p
D. Hageman wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Ian Romanick wrote:
How do we want to handle the case where a user changes video cards?
Some of the parameters are likely to be generic, but a lot will be very
device specific. The issue here is that the set of available parameters
will change. A relea
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> How do we want to handle the case where a user changes video cards?
> Some of the parameters are likely to be generic, but a lot will be very
> device specific. The issue here is that the set of available parameters
> will change. A releated issue
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:53:10 -0800
Ian Romanick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do we want to handle the case where a user changes video cards?
> Some of the parameters are likely to be generic, but a lot will be very
> device specific. The issue here is that the set of available parameters
>
D. Hageman wrote:
I don't have a list of all of the options supported by the drivers
compiled at this momment, but below is kinda my thoughts on a schema
for such a system. If we have any XML experts out there that are really
good at designing such a thing - speak up now!
...
