On Sat, 15 May 1999 pbrown@redhat.com wrote:

> Several people have suggested to me that the new Desktop Entry Standard
> define the on-disk file in XML.  What we really care about is the actual
> keys and values, the on-disk format isn't nearly as important.  XML would
> give us a clearly defined, hierarchical system (something the current
> ini-like format lacks) which we already have a parser for in Qt 2.0.

I must say that the most encumbering thing about the current rc files
internal format is the somehow haotic output. I mean, keys are grouped on
... groups, but inside a group the order of keys isn't predictable. Also,
there's no easy way to know what the *options* are for a key value. Plus,
there's no trivial way to extend the current format to multi-level trees
(I'd strongly love this).

XML could help with this encumberance. But I still don't think this is
worth the pain of all converting. Let's see:

XML advantages:
- structured internal layout
- possible future enhancement to multi-level trees

XML disadvantages:
- less human readable
- incumbs a high transition price when switching from the current format .
- backwards compatibility of apps would have huge costs


So, is a switch worth? I don't think so.

I think we need a more thorough analysis.


> The GNOME guys are in favor of "fixing this" as well.  They would have to
> go through the same sort of pain as us in switching to this new file
> format, as their on-disk format currently is INI-like as well.

This has less importance for our discussion. KDE has a stability
reputation to defend. And a larger kde-1.1-compatible app base to cope
with.

Cristian