Bill Wendling wrote:
>
> Also sprach Ed Carp:
> } Terje Kvernes (terjekv@ifi.uio.no) writes:
> }
> } > Ed Carp <erc@pobox.com> writes:
> } >
> } > > Terje Kvernes (terjekv@ifi.uio.no) writes:
> } > >
> } > > > personally I'd like to see procdump at least not produce html, it
> } > > > should instead produce XML and one should have a nice XSL to go
> } > > > with that. but I digress. (this should exist no matter how one
> } > > > chooses to display the information to users of course ,)
> } > >
> } > > No, no, NO! Straight ASCII. Forget the latest XML/XSL BS/hype.
> } >
> } > in the files, yes! but I'd like a tools to present this information
> } > (no matter how it is stored) as XML for other use. I really thought I
> } > was clear on that. ;)
> }
> } If the files are easy to read and parse, writing tools to produce XML or whatever becomes almost childishly simple. But that's not the point I'm trying to make - my point is, the file format should be (1) EASY for SHELL SCRIPTS to parse, and (2) EASY for HUMANS to parse, too. Why make it harder than it has to be?
> }
> Well, another reason not to use ASCII is cause many people in the world
> use characters not found in between 0x00 and 0xff.
in the kernel? could you give an example of such non-ASCII usage?
jan-simon.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:16 EST