From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 09:08:23
Jorge Lodos wrote:
> What I think PT must have that serialization library is not meant to is:
>
> 1. The ability to load/save properties independently, not as a whole.
> 2. A documented (for library extensibility) parser interface allowing parser
> developers to accomplish (1).
>
> At least 3 storages requiring (1) come to mind: windows registry, ISA Server
> storage and IIS metabase.
> I would put these requisites as conditions for acceptance.
I think it is quite hard to require that a parser for
config file X must exists for us to accept the library. It puts a great
deal of burden on the library author. Our focus should be on
the general core interface of the library s.t. we get a flexible
solution that can be useful in many areas.
Then if the author agrees to it, we can look at new parsers.
-Thorsten