Brad Chapman wrote: > > I would like to store everything in one format only, and I want to > stick with xml since we already have that. I don't see any reason why > we can't have an xml tag like: > > <widget name='gtk_selection_widget' x='25' y='38' /> > > and if the ui doesn't have widgets (ie. a text based ui) it just > ignores these tags (assuming it is using a script saved on a gui based > ui). > I think one thing we don't need is more files being introduced > into the filesystem and would like to keep everything describing a > node in a single file of xml. If we introduce the idea of xml that can > be parsed into a widget by the ui, then this should be in a separate > file, but I want to keep simple info like widgets and x/y position > together. *Most* uis that are implemented will want this type of info. Okay, I agree. It does seem simplest to put this "meta-data XML" in with the network XML. And here I am arguing against mixing content and presentation :-P But to help the DL identify which tag belongs to which UI (or even layer), shouldn't the UI's name be in there? Example: <meta owner='peep' type='widget' data='selection'/> <meta owner='pied' type='position' data='25,38'/> Jeff -- +----------------------------------+ | J.W. Bizzaro | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/~jeff/ | | | | BIOINFORMATICS.ORG | | The Open Lab | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/ | +----------------------------------+