Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Klintus Fang" data-source="post: 422746" data-attributes="member: 3580">The last application you describe Sm!rk sounds a lot like NWN or Everquest or Ultima Online!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" /> As for coding to another small developers SDK, how comfortable I am with that really depends on what the development environment looks like and how restrictive it is.  If its simple, lightweight and doesn't force me to code in a way that complicates my coding style I'm fine.  If it ties my code in someway to the owner of the SDK or allows that owner to leverage my work for its profit I am not happy with that.I have to like the tool the code links in with too.  And I am still undecided about CS.  But I wouldn't say I'd never work in such an environment.A freeware SDK would be nice.But anyway, back to the very original point of this thread:  I think that establishing a data format should come first and in any case is required no matter what the other details end up being.I don't have a lot of experience defining data formats, other than hacking up our own off the cuff formats for in-house tools at work.  I'm intrigued by XML because an XML data definition appears to have the feel of a class definition.  I feel like I'm designing a class hierarchy when I take a stab at encoding something in an XML format.  The two things appear to compliment each other very well.  And I have lots of experience with the former so the latter seems pretty straightforward because of it.In any case, I keep mentioning (I think it was on another thread) that what I would really like to do is encode the SRD game mechanics in an XML format (or something else if that turns out to be better).  I envision being able to do things like, check the rule_definitions.xml file to see what the stats are.  Abstractly I'm thinking of everything as a "stat".  Ability scores are stats, a character's race is a stat.   A character's name is a stat.  I'm trying to figure out if some carefully defined schema could encode the idea that stats exist and that there are rules for constructing "things" that contain "collections" of stats (characters, monsters, or at a lower level, pieces of equipment) and then rules for transforming those things (leveling up characters, adding or taking equipment away from characters, killing characters <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" />, or whatever).  I'm wondering if it's possible to encode it all in such a way that it is then possible to build a model of the rule system from the rule_definition file without assuming anything about the rules other than the most basic primitive things (in fact I know it's theoretically possible (after all my mind is able to construct an ad-hoc model of the rule system just by reading the SRD as is...) but is it practical?).Does this seem implementable?  Is it a waste of time to implement even if it is doable?  I'm curious what others think, but I don't want to hijack this thread either.</blockquote>

Verification