Correct XML syntax

[Guest GerrishGray]

Hi JohnThanks for the input and support in trying to convince everyone that MS's choice OF XML makes sense. I see no point in speculating about a future version of FS using XML files direct because we have just been given a new binary version and its not going to be replaced again one version down the road. No version of BGL has ever been truly compiled, of course, all we really get is p-code tokens thatt are still being interpreted at runtime, not executed directly. But what MS have been doing for some time now is to move away from the old concept of a high level interpreter that did all sorts of repetitive work, like triangulation, for us, to a much lower-level system where the p-code is closer to the final instructions and data needed for execution, with much faster execution speeds as a result.By the way, Dick mentioned an intermediate code that can be viewed/logged by using the /V parameter. This is not actually a separate intermediate pseudocode - it is just the first stage output of the XML parser and is still basically the same stuff as the original XML source. We will definitely be needing some XSL stuff to replace the compile time facilities in SCASM for user variables, calculations, etc - I doubt that Manfred will rewrite SCASM for the new BGL format because he has expressed his dislike of XML in the first place. But then again, I suppose he doesn't have to get involved in XML because he would be compiling direct to the new RIFF format and could keep the general syntax of SCASM substantially intact ...But until we get the MakeMDL SDK as well we can't really come to any overall conclusions about the changes.(Sorry about the lack of input from me for past 48hrs guys - I was away in London on business. Home for Xmas now so I'll try to get some work done on the BGLComp documentation ...)CheersGerrish