Re: plugin XML files

[Gerry Duprey <gerry@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Howdy

>>1) Root node agnosticism
>
> I have no problem with this - I was thinking the same thing only
> recently.
>
> It appears that xPLHal currently ignores the name of the root node
> anyway, so how about we change it to just <xpl-plugin>.

That would be cool (I really didn't think it was possible or really worth
doing because it might break xPLHAL, but if not - yeah :-)


>>2) Device information

> <device id="johnb-winamp"
>   description="An xPL plug-in for the Winamp Media Player"
>   version="1.3"
>   url="http://www.xpl.myby.co.uk/info/xplwinamp/";>

I really like it!  Nice thing, existing programs would likely just ignore
attributes they don't understand (they probably do that already).


>>3) Config item regular expressions
>>Big fan of regular expressions myself.  However, it's not
>>clear which set of regular expressions are supported here.
>
>
> Whatever .NET supports :-)
>
> Remember this file was only ever intended for use with xPLHal, so
there
> was never an issue with differing implementations of regex.

No problem -- figured something like that.  I think it's important to see
if
we can find a web site that crystallized the .NET regexp info and include a
pointer to it in that great template plugin file.  Mostly so folks know
what
they can do with those regexp (that is, folks who already know regexp in
general, but want to know the specifics of that implementation) and for
folks on non-.NET platforms who want to parse/process regexp as closely as
originally intended.

In fact, here it is from the horses mouth:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpgenref/html/cpconRegularExpressionsLanguageElements.asp


>>4) controltype, menuItem & conditionalvisibility These items

> But the whole file is UI-oriented - that was the point of making them
in
> the first place - to provide a user interface to help the user get the
> most out of what the device can do.

I get that -- I can easily imagine cases where non-GUI apps read the files
too (like for making a scripting engine smarter with automatic builtins
based on xPL devices discovered and looked up in here).

> But as UI stuff is such an important part of the file, I think it
> deserves to remain as part of the main file.

I'm good with this -- I realize, if nothing else, there is an important
historical/existing-base issue and any payback (which really is just a
purism thing -- it's easy enough to ignore the UI elements when you're not
doing UI)) is really minimal.

So mostly, I was just thinking aloud.  Heck, I was (and am) totally OK with
no changes in the file (though would think it's great if the root node
things works out as you suggest).

Thanks,

Gerry
--
Gerry Duprey
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
http://www.cdp1802.org