On Wednesday 06 February 2002 12:56, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >. . . > <transform src="[news]:[rss]->[document].[xslt]/no-abstract"/> > <transform src="[structure]:[layout]->[document].[xslt]"/> > <transform src="[skin]:[document]->[fo].[xslt]/A4/with-index"/>
This looks ugly (or is it just me?) which is usually not a good sign ;-) >. . . > The same functionality can be done eliminating this further address > space by taking the internal component file space and mapping it > one2one with the contract: > > <transform src="[news]://adaptors/rss2document/no-abstract.xslt"/> > <transform src="[structure]://adaptors/layout2document.xslt"/> > <transform > src="[skin]://stylesheets/document2fo/A4/with-index.xsl"/> >. . . Yes, I agree here - not enforcing all contracts at the [virtual protocol] level, but having additional subcontracts more loosely defined at a second level, did I get it right? Looks at lot like polymorphism to me: considering no-abstract.xslt as an object of its "superclass" [news:]//adaptors/rss2document without caring about the details. - Bertrand --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
