DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-10
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Xml in packaging system

From: David Leimbach <leimy2k@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:25:27 -0600

Just as an aside... Over at opendarwin.org we are working on a new archive called xar which uses
XML Table of Contents. This lends some nice abilities like random access to the byte streams.

Its still in early development and we wouldn't ming having more developers from another OS project talk about
their concerns on the lists I don't think.


It may or may not interest you but its something else that's out there.


On Oct 30, 2003, at 5:10 PM, Vadim Chekan wrote:

Also it would allow to compete several tools as soon as data format (called "schema" in xml language) is stable.
I think this is a good example of a problem not to use xml with.
If this were a talk about sending electronic data and to use something
such as ANSI X.12 v.s. XML, XML would be the best choice. XML
should be best left for electronic data interchange and not application

I'm afraid I do not get what you mean. Why do you think that xml has so limited applicable area?

You can think about xml as about a tree like data format with custom attributes feature. And a bunch of tools provided for format verification(schema), query language(xpath), transformation(xsl) etc. It does not sound like definition for "electronic data interchange".
Why "interchange" only?
Why not "generic-purposes hierarchical data format"?

Ok. Finaly it can be something else, not xml. Xml is just an example. Why I really wrote the mail is to tell which features I'd like to see in port system. It is flexible n-level depth tree structure, and some easy way to parse port attributes. At the moment I believe xml is good choise taking into account features I wish.

Vadim Chekan

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]