On 03/07/2011 04:02 AM, Nick Andre wrote:
> On 06 Mar 11  23:43:09, David Collins said the following to Mark Lewis:

> Software authors usually don't like it if someone were to insert additional
> files into their archives... akin to the days of ASCII files inserted by
> test-doors like THD Proscan, for example. So theres that problem.

Post a note around that authors are capable of opting out. :P

I guess putting something in is only an issue if they specified you can 
not distributed a modified archive.  Maybe you could just archive their 
archive with your xml so you are not modifying their archive. ;)

>
> There is absolutely no incentive for Sysops to use a new description format,
> as most feel that DIZ works fine. Unless the Sysop or BBS software author
> enjoys recompiling code to support the new format.
>
> The other problem is that the new format is introducing things that are the
> job of the BBS to handle... ie. file creation date, author referencing,
> popularity/download counters, etc.

Then the next idea would be the file area door. :)

>
> I know I'm talking exactly like those who shot down my proposal to add
> XML-like metatags in the Fido nodelist :)
>

So adding a nodelist alternative format is a no-no then?  What if you 
did it secretly and released it on the internet where it would never go 
away? ;)

Thanks!

Dave Collins
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux