Jeff Turner wrote:
> > That's an issue I've come up against too - it seems that views are
> > still too "tangled" up with labels and can't cut across pipelines
> > properly. At least, that's how I understand it - maybe I'm missing
> > something?
>
> I think labels and Views are independent of each other. You
> can have a
> view defined with 'from-position', and not use labels.
> Labels are just
> generic markers, with nothing to say they're only useful for defining
> views.
But with from-position you can have only "first" and "last" which is even
more restrictive than labels. If you want to do anything very sophisticated
don't you need labels?
> Views give _every_ public URL in a sitemap an alternative
> form. If you
> only need an alternative form of some URLs, then that can be
> done just as
> you've described above, with a request-param selector.
So ... I could just have use a RequestParamSelector to create my different
views for the crawler? Damn!
My problem was that I wanted to use Lucene to index a "content" view of 2
different pipelines, one of them based on TEI and another on HTML. In the
case of the TEI pipeline I didn't want to convert the TEI to HTML first and
then produce a "content" view based on an HTML-ized view of the TEI - I
wanted an indexable view of the TEI. This is the same issue as you mention
below:
> The problem is that Views don't know the type of data they're getting.
> If we have a view with from-label="content", we know it's content, but
> what _type_ of content? What schema? What transformation
> can we apply
> to create a links-view of this content?
If you could create more than one view with the same name, then we could use
labels to specify the schema:
e.g. 2 pipelines containing:
...
<map:generate src="{1}.xml" label="tei"/>
...
and
<map:transform src="blah-to-html.xsl" label="html"/>
... and 2 views called "content", one with from-label="tei" and the other
with from-label="html".
Cheers
Con
