[PATCH] XML validity of kcfg files

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Sunday 31 October 2004 01:28, Christian Mueller wrote:
> Ok, committed.  But now I'll wait for the result of this discussion
> before I create any more kcfg patches.  Doesn't make much sense
> to validate them if the DTD is not intended for it by Zack. :-)

let me clarify something that seems have been lost with regards to my original 
intent in all the ensuing hubbub:

KConfigXT does not care about the order of the tags. that is not likely to 
change. that much is easy to deduce.

therefore, i just wanted to make sure that you (and others) who were spending 
your valuable time doing these things realized the changes were purely 
cosmetic and largely pedantic. now, i fully understand the drive for Beauty 
in our sources as i make changes from time to time based on an esthetic 
perception of the source code, but:

	i felt i would be remiss to remained silent if you thought you were
	spending time fixing real bugs when it was really an issue of moot conformity

if you are having fun and are satisfied with the results of your work, by all 
means please continue doing so. you aren't hurting anything, so knock 
yourself out =) in general we can use all the hands we can get ...

and i really don't see the need to spend more time on this discussion ... in 
fact, i feel a little guilty for having spawned the thread. ;-)

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43