| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: XML Nodelist Proposal |
On 3/28/2003 9:34 AM, DALE ROSS wrote to CHRIS CRANFORD: -> REPLY: 1:379/1200.0 3E17ECB1 -> TZUTC: -0500 -> RFC-References: -> CC> I may want to see a minor change to the above. I'm trying to think if -> CC> it would make better sense to list the flags in the following fashion: -> -> CC> -> CC> 33600 -> CC> whatever -> CC> whatever -> CC> whatever -> CC> V32B -> CC> V42B -> CC> [misc_flags_here_too_to_validate] -> CC> -> -> CC> This way whatever program is reading the XML nodelist knows to just -> CC> concatenate all fields that have the same tag names (ie. -> CC> compression="V32B,V42B") ... What do you think of that? -> -> hmm... I agree that they should all be children instead of attributes. Is -> it "ok" to have two children of the same name under the same parent? I thought so. If memory serves me write, most XML parsers give you the ability to generate an array in that case or concatenate the fields using a delimiting character. Chris --- Mail-ennium/32 v1.01.301.11/#01-0001* Origin: Thanks for using Mail-ennium/32 (1:379/1200.0) SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 379/1200 1 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.