On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 15:03 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > Thus I propose a top level '<features>' block within the '<domain>' XML doc. > > This block would contain tags named after each feature to be enabled. Presence > > of the named tag enables the feature, ommision disables it (thus all features > > are disabled by default - matching current behaviour). > > Sounds good to me. As well as useful to have :) > > > My only thought, is 'features' a good name for this ? Only other name I > > came up with was 'capabilities' but this is harder to spell :-) > > I think feature is actually pretty reasonable Ok, I've committed the patch along with updates to the HTML docs on the XML format. BTW, I think it would be useful to have a formal schema defined for the XML format - not for sake of validation - just to unambiguously define what we're expecting in the XML from apps. The current format.html doc is a good overview, but its not exactly precise in detailing what we expect / support. Regards, Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|