On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, David Hall wrote:

> How is offloading all graphical and extended tag WPS functions to a plugin
> in conflict with keeping it simple?

First, it keeps the core simple and that's my primary concern. Then, it is
still (in my opinion) *simpler* than the previously suggested method with a
TSR pluging that would take care of some of the tags that the ordinary WPS
screen doesn't.

> Those who value core size over eye-candy would have a nice, clean and simple
> WPS interface very similar to today (with arguably less cruft), while those
> who want massive eye-candy WPSs would have a way to implement them without
> interfering with the core functions.

Yes, but how is my suggestion not satisfying exactly what you're saying? In
fact, so does Jdgordon's too, we just have two different approaches for it.

> I'm sure I am missing something, and welcome being corrected.

I'm not sure what you're saying!

-- 
  Daniel Stenberg -- http://www.rockbox.org/ -- http://daniel.haxx.se/