----- Original Message ----- From: "Carsten Ziegeler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 3:49 PM Subject: RE: Allowed Sitemap Constructs
> Yes, of course you're right that people always wanted more than
> is available. But I think this is not a reason why we should forbid
> putting a map:select inside a map:aggregate. Because if we forbid this,
> sometime people will ask for this and we are in the same situation.
I remember discussion at the ApacheCon in London on what constructs to allow
in the sitemap.
I remember very well that many asked for "returns" in the sitemap (loops)
and forking of outputs, and it was decided that they weren't strictly
necessary, a bad as a programming practice and difficult to control and
fine-tune in implementation.
The imperative is KISS (keep it simple, stupid) against the FS (flexibility
syndrome).
Stefano exposed a very clear (and convincing) view on this and can be more
precise than me on the reasons that lead to this implementation.
The idea was basically that aggregation is part of content generation, so it
must deal only with xml content.
It was not meant to be a generic mean of aggregating pipelines but content
AFAIK.
Is this view correct?
How good is Cocoon in answering the needs that can be solved with selects in
aggregate?
People will ask for it only if they don't see a valid alternative.
What's the alternative? Is it valid, intuitive and easy enough?
Ken
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
These are the days of miracle and wonder...
...so don't cry baby, don't cry...
Paul Simon
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
