X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <20151220125839.10228.qmail@stuge.se>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:58:39 +0100
From: "Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] XML file format (what could be expected)
Mail-Followup-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <20151220120219 DOT c4644eef1a65b0eb2fb60d76 AT gmail DOT com> <20151220122659 DOT 378AF809D791 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20151220120219 DOT c4644eef1a65b0eb2fb60d76 AT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151220122659.378AF809D791@turkos.aspodata.se> <20151220120219.c4644eef1a65b0eb2fb60d76@gmail.com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> I do not think file format is important.

You are absolutely right about this, the data model is the challenge,
not how to store it, that's trivial.


> It is better to bring discussion to the structure itself, if
> visualized as a tree which forks and attributes are needed.

Indeed the structure (data model) is what we need to come up with.

Use all known constructs. Storing them is again not the problem.


> For trees I only know about one implementation detail that matter:

No implementation details matter. That is all easy.


karl AT aspodata DOT se wrote:
> If you want a tree structure you could just as well use the filesystem
..
> There is no reason to invent "new" fileformats for that.

The discussion is not about the file format, but about the data
model. How it is stored on disk is a much later question if it needs
to be asked at all. :)


I've had a brief look at EAGLE's XML structure. I think it could be a
lot worse, but I also think we can do better.


To the point: What data models does gEDA have? There are several.


//Peter