On Tue, 29 May 2001, giacomo wrote:
> > > The context and resource protocols should match the semantics for
> > > file and jar:
> > >
> > > context://relative/path/from/context/root
> > > resource://path/to/packaged/resource
> >
> > why don't we go ahead and enumerate all of the extra protocols recognized
> > by c2 and their semantics, and stick them in a document for reference.
> > i'll take a stab:
> >
> > context urls point to xml resource pipelines relative to the root of the
> > current sitemap. the same context url in two seperate sitemaps can resolve
> > to two seperate pipelines. format: context://{path}
>
> The context protocol point into the file system and not to resource
> pipeline. But yes, the same context url in two seperate sitemaps can
> resolve to two seperate files. format: context://{path}
and it's always relative to the location of the current sitemap's map
file?
> > cocoon urls point to xml resource pipelines relative to the root of the
> > current webapp. the same cocoon url in two seperate sitemaps always
> > resolves to the same resource pipeline. format: cocoon://{path}.
>
> Not sure here. As your first isn't how you thought which one is relative
> to the current sitemap and wich one is not. As this protocol is not
> implemented yet we can model it in the way we like it.
what is it's intended purpose then? if it's _not_ what i've described,
i think we need to add something to do what i've described - maybe the
webapp:// protocol?
- donald
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
