[Thoughts wanted] Parts.xml - xml improvement on Part.lst


Re: [Thoughts wanted] UPDATE: Parts.xml - xml improvement on Part.lst
#32
Steffen Wrote:Would we officially launch this new XML format, then this will create a parallel universe.
Tool implementors will have to implement not 1, but 2 parsers: one for DAT/LDR/MPD files,
and one for the new XML format.

We do not need to write XML readers. They already exist. I have a <25 line file to read parts.xml, sort it at three different levels (category, description, number at the moment) and spit out parts.lst.

Quote:Wouldn't it be simpler to use the _existing_ LDRAW syntax also for the index,
and simply separate parts by something very simple, like a line of dashes? Something like

No. Because reading .dat files is a pain in the ass. This is the main reason I chose XML file format, and I presume it's the same for Mike and Allen.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
Re: [Thoughts wanted] UPDATE: Parts.xml - xml improvement on Part.lst - by Tim Gould - 2013-02-07, 0:44

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 8 Guest(s)