On Friday 31 May 2002 11:48 am, Ewald Arnold wrote:

> That is exactly what I had in mind three years ago :-) Choosing short nam=
es=20
> saves space and is no real problem since there are few people understandi=
ng=20
> the whole structure even with the descriptive names.

Ok, well that's easy enough.  That was an easy problem to address.  :-)

I guess then at this point, we'll just support both and leave it to=20
application developers to decide which they prefer.  I'll go ahead and upda=
te=20
the code that I committed a few days ago to do this (and do some renaming=20
while I'm at it).
=20
> certainly no problem and should be a user option. There should be some=20
> plug-in=20
> mechanism anyway at least for vocabulary files to read/write other format=
s,=20
> for example a lot come in csv format.

Once we get something of an API figured out, I would suggest making an=20
abstract base class with virtual methods that all format specific=20
implementations would subclass (I know, we'll call it an "interface" -- or=
=20
maybe I've just been doing to much Java lately :-) ), including our own=20
implementation of kvtml.

=2DScott
_______________________________________________
kde-edu-devel mailing list
kde-edu-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-edu-devel