The HAL Spec

[Richard Hughes]

On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 12:46 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 17:41 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 12:06 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> > >  1. I really dunno if it's helpful having a separate spec document
> > >     because we all (myself in particular) suck at updating it. Maybe
> > >     it would be useful to have a self-documenting scheme a'la gconf
> > >     where the description of the property is just meta-data for the
> > >     property but that is a bit far out
> > 
> > I think hal-spec.xml.in should be broken up into little, easy to add
> > sections;
> > 
> > for example:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > Then we can easy match up what we've done and fix the spec section by
> > section (ripping out the old bits too).
> 
> This is way too fine-grained for my taste; how about a division where
> it's 
> 
>  - introduction
>  - physical namespaces
>  - functional namespaces

I'm not sure you can draw such a fine line between physical and
functional, as there's stuff that doesn't fit into either.

> and maybe a bit more; something like 4-5 files is the maximum before it
> gets too complicated for me. Suggestions?

4-5 seems good for me, anything other than the mega-beast we have
now :-)

The hard part is the split. I think we agree the introduction is a nice
"first cut" -- how about hal-spec-introduction.xml(.in?)

> > David, if you agree this is the best route forward, I would be happy to
> > start splitting up the hal-spec.xml.in file (exams finish on Thursday --
> > Woo!)
> 
> That would be much appreciated! Good luck on the exams!

Thanks. More revision to do, but I'm having the evening to relax (well,
hacking, if you know what I mean).

Richard.