> Any kind of launch validation is ultimately security related in some > manner. > > > By having the separate <sev> element you can make the sub-elements depend on > > this parent element, since you can't expect other vendors to favour <cbitpos> > > which add burden to the documentation to make it clear. Of course, the price > > you pay for this is a more complex XML structure. > > <launch> > > <security> > > <sev> > > <sev_specific_elements/> > > </sev> > > </security> > > This is not the way we usually do things - we wuld have a type="sev|..." > which determines what child elements are permitted, as illustrated in > the example above. Oh, right. Also, having <sev> element wouldn't make it clear that you can only have one type active, either 'sev' or some other solution. Erik -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
