At 9:10 am -0500 28/11/01, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
>> At 2:10 pm +0100 28/11/01, Michael Hartle wrote:
>>
>>>Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The main issue here though is "WritableSource". Is this the way to go?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I think already the name WritableSource shows the need for further
>>>thinking towards more basic, integrated approaches to handle both
>>>'Sources' and 'Destinations' in a protocol/transport-independent manner
>>>appropriately in Cocoon. As Cocoon is about presenting and transforming
>>>content rather than storing, currently there is no counterpart to the
>>>basic Source interface; lets design a peer counterpart to Source and
>>>make it equally integrated into Cocoon as Source is now.
>>>
>>
>> I am +1 on that!
>>
>> I am not much of an Architect though .....
>
>
>Please,
>
>check out the Monitor package of Excalibur. It has the equivalent of a
>Source (Resource) that can both read and write. Plus, it has the advantage
>of notifying listeners when the write was performed--allowing the cache
>to clean itself up.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Do you mean that this could either replace or supplement the techniques for
deriving Sources from pseudo protocol handlers, used currently in Cocoon 2?
I will read up on it.
regards Jeremy
--
___________________________________________________________________
Jeremy Quinn Karma Divers
webSpace Design
HyperMedia Research Centre
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.media.demon.co.uk>
<phone:+44.[0].20.7737.6831> <pager:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
