Re: [mbackup-devel] xml as a tape header: the cons

[James O'K. <jo...@mi...>]

On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, John Huttley wrote:
> Implementation wise, the client would create the XML header with the data and
> pass it,
> locally or over a network , to the server process.

I'm not sure I understand this. Do you plan to chance the file_tag struct
into a pointer to an xml formatted string? If that's they plan, I'm
curious about the overhead of making each module understand how to read
and add to the xml format. Right now, to change something in the file_tag
struct you can just do a file_tag->current_size = 100. If we change that
to xml, won't we have to file_tag->xml_set_current_size(100)? I'm not sure
I see how that is better. 
On the other hand, if we're just talking about having the tape-writing
module create the xml header just as we write to tape then we're on the
same page.

I was also planning on using XML to talk between modules and the GUI such
as libglade and possibly using XML for talking between client and server,
but I'm not sure if this would be the same XML format as the data on tape. 

-james