On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:13:54PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: > --- "Steve C. Lamb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > b: The format in which the configuration is expected. > Which, if you're lucky is in some sort of human-readable form.
That's not the only consideration. Take for example where one program
requires the use of quotes around the options while others they are optional
while a third would consider the quotes part of the option.
So...
path_to = /some/file
path_to = "/some/file"
...could work in the first form, the second form or both forms. Yet all are
"human readable".
> > c: The possible potions the configuration file expects.
> Which, assuming b. is half-decent, you can usually ascertain.
> Although, granted, not always.
Which I pointed out.
> > Sure are acting like it.
> Welcome to a text-based medium. Ambiguity, anyone?
I'm betting that wouldn't happen in a graphical medium.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
