RE: LDA View (was Re: View the LDA)

[<cozzi2@xxxxxxx>]

John, apparently my first paragraph got truncated when I sent that last 
message...
And, after rereading my message, the first paragraph that made it through 
should have read differently. I'll repeat them here for clarity.

PDM uses it's own internal INI structure. In Windows, applications used to 
create text files suffixed with the letter "INI".  There are still WINDOWS.INI 
and SYSTEM.INI files in use in Win95 today. These files contain settings or, 
effectively, default values for system or application properties. 

INI-like settings are used by PDM to keep track of your defaults. It does 
appear to be "keyed" by user profile. The problem is, however, that the code is 
so old that the original author can't even figure out how to bring it up to an 
API-level without "too much work". 

So we're not going to get it any time soon. 

 
> 
> John Carr,
> 
> That INI-like are what PDM uses to keep track of your defaults. It's 
> sort of "keyed" by user profile. The problem is, that it is so old, 
> the original author can't even figure out how to bring it up to an 
> API-level with "too much work". It's one of those "what's in it for 
> IBM" attitudes. So we're not going to get it any time soon. 
> 
> But what's to keep people from using a standard third-party tool, 
> like the one I wrote (bud don't sell) that provides INI-file like 
> access for application defaults? I know it would be nice to get IBM's 
> defaults for PDM and other things, but can we get at your 
> application's defaults? Probably with custom code.
> 
> I have several, solid commands, call interfaces, and ILE procedures 
> that provide access to an INI-like file. They are where I store all 
> my application defaults. 
> 
> Right now, for simplicity, I use a keyed database file to store the 
> information. That way people can access and modify the data with DFU 
> if they want. There are also commands that provide direct access to 
> specific entries.
> 
> There would be little work involved in moving this system to a 
> user-index storage media. But then you'd look multi-member support 
> (if that's important to you).
> 
> My point is, that if we all start using something, and then keep 
> asking IBM to use the same thing, perhaps, worse case, they'll 
> provide a way to copy the IBM internal defaults to this kind of 
> INI-like file, or best case, they provide use with their 
> implementation of INI-like files, and we have to switch or use two kinds.
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> Bob Cozzi
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > Frankly, I'd rather have a API into the interact user profile index.
> > It's the index space that keeps track of which OV/400 document you were in
> > last...which SEU member, etc.  THERE IS NO SECURITY INFO HERE...and I only
> > want READ access (although there are many greater minds than mine that
> > would like write/update) ...but alas, it's a undocumented space and we get
> > called low life's for even thinking of it....   
> > 
>

winmail.dat