> >> So you are against the idea of starting by having a R5 equivalent? > > > >No no, don't get me wrong, I just wanted to consider alternatives > > that > >won't take more time to implement than the original behaviour. > > Personally I believe a Pref_Server of some kind, along with a decent > XML-Format for storing an Applications > settings should not be that hard to implement (although it might > underestimate the XML-Part here). Including one in > the initial release and having the Preference Apps replacements used > when approiate, while staying compatible to > the old way of storing (if possible) should not be huge task. > > >Some kind of "Forward thinking", but perhaps it takes to much time > > to > >discuss the viable alternatives, so just do it later :-) > > Well, whoever wants to write a simple Pref_Server and define that > Settings-DTD, sure why not. If it is going to be > included in R1 or not, we`ll see. > As I personally like that idea, I propose whoever is interested in > actual doing something, mails me off-list, and we`ll > discuss further proceedings. I just don´t want another "We definetly > need this almost-unrelated-feature fast"- > Thread emerge. WHY a server? For what possible reason does a server improve on a simple library? -Nathan -- Fortune Cookie Says: "The difference between a misfortune and a calamity? If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, it would be a calamity." -- Benjamin Disraeli