[Asterisk-Users] PHP Gui for Asterisk (AGI questions)

[James Sizemore]

I agree, whole heartily, No XML please!  I suggest the requester,
take a look at Vocal if he thinks XML is a good ideal for any-e-thing
at all. I am glad most Unix configuration files have avoided "XML" hell.  

Problem will all XML configs:
1. They are nearly imposable for a human to read, for any non trivial
    config.  
2. Thus requiring a XML app to edit the config. Which in every case
    I have ever seen is always out of date with the options that are needed.
    Requiring some poor sap to read though thirty pages of crap to edit some
    XML tag to turn on some option, that the edit app does not yet support.
3. I personal find it easer to parse a human readable config file, then deal
    with any XML library that I have ever seen.
4. Seeing as you need to agree what tags you read in from application
    to application, what the hell is the difference from creating your own
    config format then your own XML format?  Take XML bookmark
    files. Every web browser has one. And no other web browser will
    read in any others bookmark file. Galeon and Konqueror will read
    each others XML bookmark files but they collaborated on the format!
    And could just as well have collaborated on a flat text file that 
was easy
    for a human to read!
5. So what was the point of XML again? They is none!


Mark Spencer wrote:

>Would someone like to propose what an XML extensions.conf would look like?
>How about an XML zapata.conf?
>
>I know XML is a fun buzzword and as a syntactic "hammer" seems instantly
>appropriate for every configuration "nail", but I think in practicality,
>XML does not lend itself to describing things like zap interfaces as
>easily and certainly not as compactly as the existing syntax does.
>
>Sure, it takes about 5-10 minutes to understand the nature of Asterisk's
>config files, but the time is well worth it, and you'll understand why it
>is done the way it is.  Why incur the overhead of trying to parse XML?
>
>Mark
>
>On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Chris Albertson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>This topic is of interrest to me because I have to re-write the
>>conf. file system on some software I'm working on.  It's currently
>>horible.  (Just keyword=value pairs minus the keyword= part)
>>
>>SOAP looks to me like a message passing protocol.  Configuration
>>needs to be placed in a persistent storage like a file.  Sometimes
>>"db" tables, LDAP, or a DBMS is used.  Either way it's "storage"
>>
>>SOAP looks like a way to send messages, not a way to store data.
>>But SOAP is XML, So I'm glad you agree about the part.
>>
>>
>>--- Jeremy McNamara <jj at indie.org> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>SOAP
>>>
>>>My 2 cents,
>>>
>>>Jeremy
>>>
>>>
>>>Chris Albertson wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I think the way to go with conf. file for Asterisk is XML.
>>>>
>>>>When I first saw the Asterisk conf files I wondered if Eric
>>>>Allman had found a new job working on Asterisk. (That's
>>>>a joke for those of you who have had to maintain a sendmail
>>>>installation.  sendmail.cf is the definition of cryptic)
>>>>
>>>>Some advantages of XML:
>>>>
>>>>1) Parsers and file editors already exist for XML.  Users could
>>>>  edit files with ready made GUI tools, programmers can use
>>>>  XML with XML libraries.  There are even web-based tools for
>>>>  maintaining XML data.
>>>>
>>>>2) Parsers and file editors can perform file validation.  Making
>>>>  it not-possible to save an invalid file.
>>>>
>>>>3) (some) Database systems can gobble up XML and spit it back
>>>>  out.  Yes, I think the DBMS idea was resonable for a large
>>>>  installation.  Overkill if less then say a few hundred
>>>>  extensions.  Large sites like to manage phone extension and,
>>>>  extension to physical location maping and other stuff in a DBMS.
>>>>
>>>>4) XML (with addition of a style sheet) can be directly displayed
>>>>  in a web browser
>>>>
>>>>5) Without a GUI and/or wrb front end the system will remain
>>>>  only "geek usable".  (Your average "phone guy" doesn't know
>>>>  how to use vi.)
>>>>
>>>>6) XML readers can ignor parts of the XML file they don't
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>understand.
>>>      
>>>
>>>>  This allows one file to carry information for multiple readers
>>>>  ad for new additions too the file not to break older readers.
>>>>
>>>>--- Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 11:36, Stefano Finetti wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>I was wondering about a little php-based GUI to manage Asterisk
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Extensions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Many way to obtain this, but i think that implementing in a php
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>script the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>AGI Commands should obtain the best results (more, the best result
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>would
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>come with AGI+Mysql instead of a text file like extensions.conf
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>