Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> Hi team,
>
> I just fixed a bug in the treeprocessor which was not handling views in
> map:aggregate like the compiled engine (see
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7196). However, this
> made me wonder about what should be the correct behaviour.
>
> Let's consider the sitemap snippet that revealed the bug (from the docs
> sitemap) :
>
> <map:view name="content" from-label="content">
> <map:serialize type="xml"/>
> </map:view>
> ...
> <map:match pattern="*.html">
> <map:aggregate element="site">
> <map:part src="cocoon:/book-{1}.xml"/>
> <map:part src="cocoon:/body-{1}.xml" label="content"/>
> </map:aggregate>
> <map:transform src="stylesheets/site2xhtml.xsl">
>
> The label="content" on the 2nd part is used to select parts depending on
> the view. Both implementations do that equally well, that is, when
> requesting view "content", only "body-{1}.xml" is included.
>
> The difference was about whether a part label should imply or not a jump
> to the view :
> - the compiled engine automatically jumps to the view as soon as one
> map:part has a corresponding label even if the map:aggregate doesn't
> have this label.
> - before fixing the bug, the interpreted engine jumped to the view
> _only_ if the map:aggregate also had a corresponding label (i.e.
> label="content" in the above snippet).
>
> My opinion is that there are some uses case where automatic jump isn't
> good. Let's consider the following :
> <map:view name="books" from-label="books">
> ...
> <map:aggregate element="root">
> <map:part src="isbn-codes.xml" label="books"/>
> <map:part src="authors.xml"/>
> <map:aggregate>
> <map:transform src="isbn2books.xsl" label="books"/>
> <map:transform src="books2html.xsl"/>
> <map:serialize/>
>
> The "books" view should give the list of books. With automatic jump, the
> above only gives a list of isbn codes and we cannot apply
> "isbn2books.xsl". On the contrary, explicit labels mean that there's no
> jump to the view from map:aggregate and that the stylesheet is correctly
> applied.
>
> So, in short, my opinion is that labels of map:part should be for
> _selecting_ which parts belong to the view, and that view branching
> should depend _only_ on the labels of map:aggregate.
>
> What is your opinion ?
My opinion is that:
1) the 'exit from last label' fixes your concern in the above example,
so no need to futher question this.
2) both <map:aggregate> and <map:part> can have labels
Here are examples of use
1) part has label:
<aggregate>
<part ... label="content"/>
<part .../>
</aggregate>
the result is the output of the part, without any further processing
(the aggregator becomes transparent)
2) both part and aggregate has label
<aggregate label="content">
<part ... label="content"/>
<part .../>
</aggregate>
the result is the output of the aggregator, the internal label is
overruled.
3) more than one part has the same label
<aggregate>
<part ... label="content"/>
<part ... label="content"/>
<part .../>
</aggregate>
this should be implemented by having the aggregator perform the
aggregation of the views that contain the requested label (the other
parts are ignored).
I don't think this is the current behavior, but this is how I picture
that aggregation should work with views.
Hope this clarifies things out.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
