> From: Torsten Curdt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> 
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Greg Weinger wrote:
> 
> > > I have another one, it provides different functionality but it
> > features
> > > similar approach. As I don't have a name for this (multiplexer?),
here
> > > is the diagram:
> > >
> > >                   - pipeline1 -
> > >                  /              \
> > > request -> A -> X - pipeline2 - X -> C -> response
> > >                  \              /
> > >                   - pipelineN -
> > >
> > > Explanation:
> > > 1. Request goes in
> > > 2. Pipeline is being constructed from A, X, C
> > > 3. SAX events passed from the A to X, where they are dispatched
(same
> > as
> > > separator) to several other pipelines
> > > 4. SAX events passed from these events reassembled into the one
SAX
> > > stream by the same instance of X component
> > > 5. Result passed down the original pipeline to the C
> > > 6. C spits out the response
> > >
> > > Don't answer "hey, you can do this with content aggregator" - it
is
> > not
> > > true, this is a different thing.
> > >
> > > Waiting for comments...
> >
> >
> > Tell me if this is different from what you're talking about: a
> > Transformer/Generator pair that acts like a combination of
(modified)
> > FragmentExtractor and CInclude.
> >
> > Say we have a MultiplexingTransformer [MT] in a pipeline like this:
> >
> >
> >     Request --> G -> T -> MT -> S --> Response
> >
> >
> > MultiplexingTransformer calls 1-n pipleines via the cocoon:/
protocol.
> > The MultiplexingTransformer byte-compiles all the SAX events within
a
> > given element, like this:
> >
> >     <mx:dispatch src="cocoon:/otheruri"
> > xmlns:mx="http://multiplexer";>
> >
> >             . . . xml elements . . .
> >
> >       </mx:dispatch>
> >
> > And forwards the XMLFragment in a request attribute.
> >
> > A MultiplexingGenerator [MG], at the head of each of the 1-n
pipelines
> > retrieves and serialzes the XMLFragment.
> >
> >         Request --> MG -> T -> S --> Response
> >
> > This is very similar to something I'm currently working on.  If
other
> > people would find it useful, I will generalize this and offer it up.
> >
> > Or did you have some other pipeline component magic in mind?  :)
> 
> 
> Did I get you guys right? You want to merge XML streams?

Split, pass through several pipelines, and merge together.

 
> Merging XML is a tough one...

Not (much) tougher than CIncludeTransformer and ContentAggegator :)

Vadim

> --
> Torsten


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to