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


Re: [Thoughts wanted] V3 - Parts.xml - xml improvement on Part.lst
#38
Tim Gould Wrote:OK. Since I'm not expanding the keywords list out (which would require sub-tags) I'll use attributes.

Why not separate? Isn't the whole point of this xml file so 3rd party software doesn't need to parse/disect stuff?

My 2cts:

Code:
<Part>
<Keywords>
  <Item>Classic space</Item>
  <Item>Space police</Item>
</Keywords>

<History>
  <Item date="yyymmdd" author="piet">Some kind of historic rant.</Item>
  <Item date="yyymmdd" author="sjaak">Another historic rant.</Item>
</History>
</Part>

As for elm vs attr discussion, I think the core rule is: An attribute needs to say something about an element's data.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
Re: [Thoughts wanted] V3 - Parts.xml - xml improvement on Part.lst - by Roland Melkert - 2013-02-07, 18:42

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)