thomassen

thomassen

Joined Member # 509772
22 Posts 162 Replies 27,504 Reputation
Reply to DesktopX Standards 0.2 in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

I suggested in the 0.1 proposal that the "dxinfo" (now changed to "dxAOI" and "dxCUI") part of the path string ("dxinfo\information\weather") ,to access the DOM three, would be optional. I still think it would be reasonable to do so. Because these are root elements of the XML file, they would allways be required to be there anyway. Unless the user want to obtain an array with all the settings of the setting file I see no reason why the root element should be required. I'd much rather use "in

12 Replies 19,927 Views
Reply to DesktopX Standards 0.2 in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

the italic text in the last post is a result of me writing . Didnt know HTML formatting was on. This whole project makes things a little easier for me as I had plans to make a theme that would be easily configurable by the user. It will probably make heavy, if not total, usage of the features written down in these proposal.

12 Replies 19,927 Views
Reply to DesktopX Standards 0.2 in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

* Central place, easy accessed for developers to obtain the latest standards. Othervise it's just end up beeing confusing to what the latest standard really is. Might be useful to keep record of old versions as well. That way developers can know how far back their objects are compatible. * section would be much more useful if DesktopX had a Colorize function. With a colorsize function developers could simply create grayscale images that would be colorized. But no such thing

12 Replies 19,927 Views
Reply to DesktopX Standards 0.1 in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

A little semantic addition. for the section: I belive is a better choice of word than and instead of Working out some good names that lead to less confusion and describe the content is something that I think will be important to make this rock solid.

22 Replies 20,874 Views
Reply to DesktopX Standards 0.1 in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

This is very good. I got some proposal. * Change ver="0.1" to version="0.1" and to as it makes for easier reading. With too many shortened words it may end up confusing as the list of settings will grow. * Have version control for the sub categories as well. i.e. . I was thinking if only a sub-section where to be changed it would create less incompatibillity issues if only the version number for the subsection is increased as oppose to the entire setting file.

22 Replies 20,874 Views
Reply to DesktopX Common information in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

I tell you what, give me time out this week and I'll see if I have time to complete my XML parser and make the first draft of a XML setting tool. Another thing about XML is that it's crossover compatible with basicly any system, so exising XML setting schemes can easily be used with little or no modifications.

21 Replies 21,801 Views
Reply to DesktopX Common information in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

XML is very easy. I'm actaully working on a XHTML parser to validate XHTML files. It can esily be converted to read XML files. As for where the setting to be saved I reakon it can simply be made in any directory that the user spesify. That way you can very esily make different setups. The path of the directory would be saved in the script object persitent storage.

21 Replies 21,801 Views
Reply to DesktopX Common information in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

In stead of using the registry, how about using XML? I think XML will be more manageble than using the registry. Say if I want to transfer my settings from one computer to antoher, I would much rather just copy an XML file or and directory of XML files containg my setting than having to roam around in the registry to get them. And besides this is the sort of stuff where the power of XML comes to life. Though it would be nice of there was a central site that contained a list of these XML

21 Replies 21,801 Views
Reply to Blog: Aero Skinning, Modelers, and unorthodox skinning... in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

skyguybcn: Bringing the advanced features of XP to the Win9x serie is simply not possible due to limitations of the 9x serie it self. The 9x serie is horrible when it comes to GUI handling and there isn't possible for a third party to fix this. And it wouldn't be worth the effort either. 98 is a six years old OS and 95 is nine! That very old in computer terms. And the target user group isn't that great anymore since computers comes with new OS (meaning XP in these days) so a compute

101 Replies 41,344 Views
Reply to Adventures in OS customization in Beginners JoeUser Forums

msetzer: When did you try the Stardock products. If you haven't tries them for a while I really recommend you try them again. They are now using *very* little resources. Espesially if you have a semi-decent graphicscard to do the drity-work. I'd say that Object Dock Plus is the nost notisable SD product at the moment.

12 Replies 21,146 Views
Reply to Brad's Friday Night Skinning Blog Entry in WinCustomize News WinCustomize Forums

"True-color high resolution boot screen"..? O_o yes, yes yes! Let us have it! Dump it in ODNT or anything, just get it out. I've found that the current bootscreen are useless because they are mostly a big mess because people don't spend enough time trying to convert their fullcolor bootscreen into a proper lowbit palette. The ones that actually looks nice are then again mostly Longhorn and XP tweaked bootscreens. Making bootscreen with the currnet limitations aren't easy. It's a big job rescalin

22 Replies 11,791 Views