Vadim Gritsenko wrote: >>From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > <snip/> > > >>I have seen Cocoon newbies really frightened by the lengthy >><map:components> section full of class names that starts the sitemap. >>When they finally arrive at <map:pipelines>, their mindstate is such >>that they hardly perceive the simplicity of the language. >> > > Can I then suggest something? Is it meaningful to move Cocoon built-in > component declarations into cocoon.xconf (preserving ability to declare > them in sitemap, of course)? > > Then sitemap will be greatly simplified, and sitemap from "chello.war" > could be as simple as several lines. > > Are there issues with this approach?
Not really. This is a good idea as it would allow newbies to be less frightened :) But it will more likely cause sitemap interoperability problems than hints, because a type can be more easily changed that a hint, which is part of the language definition (in the TreeProcessor). However, this problem already exists since it is the same behaviour as subsitemaps inheriting component definitions from their parent sitemap. Change the type in the parent sitemap, and the children are broken ! > >>Using hints in the sitemap is just like using "jdbc" or "j2ee" in the >>"datasources" section of cocoon.xconf : hints avoid explicitly naming >>the class, but their name identify their functionnality. >> One more thing about local components : we talked several times about being able to choose locally between caching/non-caching pipelines. Local components allow this choice to be done at sitemap level. > > BTW: I'm not against hints in sitemap... Cool :) -- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies - http://www.anyware-tech.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
