SR3D uses a patch file system to be able to virtually add data to part files without having to edit the library. (This is one example of many ways to add data to the part library without touching the actual .dat files.)
My view is that the syntax and storage format for connection data is really quite moot as long as the semantics are compatible with _eventually_ putting the data into the parts directly.
As an example, consider the case of putting a connection on a stud. If stud.dat is marked with a connection (via a separate database or patch file or any of these systems that avoid touching the library), does the connection become present in every single part that references stud.dat?
If the answer is "yes" then converting the data from patch files or a separate XML table to data in the library .dat files would be straight forward because the meaning of the data hasn't changed, only where we store it.
But if the answer is "no" (e.g. the XML file describes connections for a part but not parts that use that part) could be very difficult because it would be hard to maintian the old meaning when applied to the library.
So I think it is important to have a system that _can_ work with the part library someday. But it is okay to have it not do this immediately. (E.g. Sergio's "patch file" scheme could be adequate as a way to get started.)
My view is that the syntax and storage format for connection data is really quite moot as long as the semantics are compatible with _eventually_ putting the data into the parts directly.
As an example, consider the case of putting a connection on a stud. If stud.dat is marked with a connection (via a separate database or patch file or any of these systems that avoid touching the library), does the connection become present in every single part that references stud.dat?
If the answer is "yes" then converting the data from patch files or a separate XML table to data in the library .dat files would be straight forward because the meaning of the data hasn't changed, only where we store it.
But if the answer is "no" (e.g. the XML file describes connections for a part but not parts that use that part) could be very difficult because it would be hard to maintian the old meaning when applied to the library.
So I think it is important to have a system that _can_ work with the part library someday. But it is okay to have it not do this immediately. (E.g. Sergio's "patch file" scheme could be adequate as a way to get started.)