Re: Use of XML for config files

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>]

"Grein, Christoph" <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com> writes:

> > I would prefer nested configuraton sections, and simplify the notation
> > for key/value pairs:
> > 
> > <configuration>
> >   <section name="Section1">
> >     <section name="SubSectionA">
> >       <key name="Key1">Value1</key>
> >       <key name="Key2">Value2</key>
> >     </section>
> >     <key name="KeyX">ValueX</key>
> >   </section>
> > </configuration>
> 
> I would also prefer this syntax. It's much shorter and thus easier to read.

The draft implementation I'm working on uses this instead:

<config>
  <Section1>
    <SubSectionA>
      <Key1>Value1</Key1>
      <Key2>Value2</Key2>
    </SubSectionA>
    <KeyX>ValueX</KeyX>
  </Section1>
</config>

This is the style generated by the Glib.XML package. It's even shorter
:).

I am an XML beginner. I gather the <key name="foo">value</key> style is
more amenable to definition via DTD or schema? What other virtues does
it have?

I'll look into modifying the Glib.XML package to generate this style,
as draft implementation 2.

-- 
-- Stephe