Robert Sayre wrote:
On 10/26/05, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, it's because I haven't seen any demonstrated hard requirement for
collection nesting. I fully recognize the need for multiple collections
per blog; that does not mean that a media collection has to be nested
"arranged hierarchically" under the entry collection as the example in
your draft demonstrates.
I've already explained this to you once.
I'll try not to be so dense in the future
There multiple blogs that
each have multiple collections associated with them. When you write a
client today, you'll find that there's nothing there to guide you
about which thing to show first or which collections should be grouped
together. Here's what we have today. Let me know if there's something
you don't understand.
What I don't understand is why nesting of collections is required. Why
does one collection have to be arranged hierarchically under another.
Why the example in your draft shows a media collection under an entry
collection. Nothing in your statement above gives any reason why
nesting of collections is necessary. Nothing in your argument gives any
reason why the Workspace/Collection arrangement in -05 is inadequate to
solving the problem. Nothing in your argument gives any reason why the
following wouldn't work.
<ul class="xoxo">
<li>
Side Bar Blog
<ul>
<li><a href="..." rel="entry" type="...">Entries</a></li>
<li><a href="..." rel="media" type="...">Pictures</a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
I'm not arguing for the status quo. Never have. What I am arguing is
that you have yet to demonstrate a technical reason why collections need
to be hierarchically arranged under other collections... and, to my
knowledge, you have not yet answered that question.
That is, without any snarky language, why is (a) better than (b).
(a)
Account
|
+ Blog 1 Entry Collection
| + Blog 1 Media Collection
|
+ Blog 2 Entry Collection
+ Blog 2 Media Collection
(b)
Account
|
+ Blog 1
| + Entry Collection
| + Media Collection
|
+ Blog 2
+ Entry Collection
+ Media Collection
Regarding the XOXO approach in general... would you consider the
following to be an acceptable service outline?
<ul class="xoxo">
<li>
<a href="/entries"
rel="entry" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="mainblog.png"
alt=""/></a>
<ul>
<li><a href="/app/collection.py?id=2&type=media"
rel="media" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="mystuff.png"
alt=""/></a>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="/app/collection.py?id=14"
rel="entry" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="mydrafts.png"
alt=""/></a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
<a href="/app/collection.py?id=3&type=entries"
rel="entry" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="sidebarblog.png"
alt=""/></a>
<ul>
<li><a href="..."
rel="media" type="..."><img src="mystuff4.png" alt=""/></a>
<ul>
<li><a href="..."
rel="entry" type="application/atom+xml"></a>
<ul>
<li>
<dl>
<dt>A collection</dt>
<dd><a href="..." rel="media"
type="..."><b>foobar1</b></a></dd>
<dt>A 2nd collection</dt>
<dd><a href="..." rel="entry" type="...">foobar2</a></dd>
<dt><a href="...">Something else</a></dt>
<dd>
<ul>
<li><a href="..." rel="media"
type="..."><img src="foobar3.png" alt="" /></a>
</li>
</ul>
</dd>
</dl>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
<a href="/app/collection.py?id=5&type=entries"
rel="entry" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="thirdblog.png"
alt=""/></a>
<ul>
<li>
<a href="/app/collection.py?id=6&type=media"
rel="media" type="application/atom+xml"><img src="mystuff6.png"
alt=""/></a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
