Skip to content

Feedback on the XML registry schemaΒ #2596

@miss-programgamer

Description

@miss-programgamer

Were you just expecting people to feed the contents of the type tags to a C compiler frontend or what? What's the point of putting all this information into an XML document if half its contents is just gonna be barely annotated C code anyway. Did anyone think this through or did you not realize it would only be useful for generating C headers?

Just redo the whole thing at this point, add a version number to the registry root tag and create a new schema from the ground up. People are already using third party rewrites of the damn thing anyway, it's not like anyone is using the existing document directly as it stands. No one's gonna care about back compat if no one was realistically using the original version.

And no, this isn't flame for its own sake, I genuinely want things to improve, I'm just extremely frustrated at how sloppily this was initially handled and how stubborn the existing direction is about keeping the current format. Please actually write something worthy of an international, industry-wide standard.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions