James Carlson wrote: > Jordan Brown wrote: >> Metadata-driven user interfaces can be pretty good, [...] > > I mostly agree, but as I understand the original goal of SMF, it was > expected that most non-trivial subsystems would end up getting > customized interfaces to deal with the complications of user > presentation rather than forcing users into svccfg.
Sure. I just regard svccfg as the lowest level, most primitive metadata-driven user interface. It's not nearly as fancy as one might like, but that doesn't mean that it can't pay attention to the various constraints and hints too. It also doesn't mean that higher-level user interfaces, either customized or metadata-driven, aren't also appropriate.
