Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DarkWhite" data-source="post: 504861" data-attributes="member: 9027">Point taken re D&amp;D vs d20/OGL .. though similar, they are indeed different beasts, and cater to different audiences.I am fully aware of what e-Tools is and isn't capable of, and that third party software fills many of these gaps.&nbsp; However, I see the d20 software market a young emerging one, and there is still plenty of opportunity for growth in many areas by different players.&nbsp; Choice of software is quite a matter of personal taste, and individual needs.&nbsp; I suspect that Campaign Suite's sales have increased moreso in the months since eTools release points to consumers going online seeking eTools support, and instead finding viable alternatives to that software.&nbsp; More credit to third party developers!All the more need for a common d20 XML standard.&nbsp; However, your point is valid that d20 is broader than D&amp;D, and eTools only purposes to support core D&amp;D.Some of the other areas you raised: mapping, campaign worlds, class editing, even eye colour, which eTools does not support, are also data which could benefit by being codified in XML so that the data can be shared with other programs which might display or use this data in their own way.Though with the d20 publishing industry being the can of worms that it is: one new rules variant after another; one wonders whether there could ever be a d20 XML standard, or whether it will be like trying to hit a moving target?Finally, XSL can also be used to transform XML documents into *other* XML documents of a different format.&nbsp; While this strays from the ideal of one common d20 XML format to be shared by all, it should provide a means of converting data between the &quot;community&quot; standard and &quot;rogue&quot; XML formats, such as the format eTools uses (though unsupported data &quot;eye colour?&quot; will understandably be lost, or simply unrecognised, in the process).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DarkWhite, post: 504861, member: 9027"] Point taken re D&D vs d20/OGL .. though similar, they are indeed different beasts, and cater to different audiences. I am fully aware of what e-Tools is and isn't capable of, and that third party software fills many of these gaps. However, I see the d20 software market a young emerging one, and there is still plenty of opportunity for growth in many areas by different players. Choice of software is quite a matter of personal taste, and individual needs. I suspect that Campaign Suite's sales have increased moreso in the months since eTools release points to consumers going online seeking eTools support, and instead finding viable alternatives to that software. More credit to third party developers! All the more need for a common d20 XML standard. However, your point is valid that d20 is broader than D&D, and eTools only purposes to support core D&D. Some of the other areas you raised: mapping, campaign worlds, class editing, even eye colour, which eTools does not support, are also data which could benefit by being codified in XML so that the data can be shared with other programs which might display or use this data in their own way. Though with the d20 publishing industry being the can of worms that it is: one new rules variant after another; one wonders whether there could ever be a d20 XML standard, or whether it will be like trying to hit a moving target? Finally, XSL can also be used to transform XML documents into *other* XML documents of a different format. While this strays from the ideal of one common d20 XML format to be shared by all, it should provide a means of converting data between the "community" standard and "rogue" XML formats, such as the format eTools uses (though unsupported data "eye colour?" will understandably be lost, or simply unrecognised, in the process). [/QUOTE]

Verification