Vadim Gritsenko wrote: >>From: Mattam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> >>Ivelin Ivanov [Sun, 09 Jun 2002 11:22:07 -0500]: >> >>| >>| Two almost identical transformers are confusing me. >>| What is the difference between the two? >>| Should one be deprecated? >>| >>| I'd vote for the one which implements the W3C XInclude spec closest. >>| Maybe it should take the best of the other one. >>| >> >>CInclude allows cocoon:/ protocol, and XInclude tends to be a strict >>implementation of the standard. Maybe keeping only XInclude while > > allowing the > >>cocoon:/ protocol (with a switch?) would be the better. > > > That's not right; XInclude also works with cocoon: protocol, they both > use Cocoon's resolver. > > IIRC, the reason of CInclude existence is completely different: if you > remove CInclude, it will be more complicated to serve documents with > inclusions and with tags in xinclude namespace. Right now, this is not > an issue: create document with xinclude *and* cinclude tags, process it > through cinclude, and xinclude will remain intact, no sweat.
Does this justify a separate code base though? Allowing the Xinclude component to act on a sitemap parameter specified namespace should do. > > Vadim > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- -= Ivelin =- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
