> What I would like to be able to do is specify a flow for > the report masks, and a seperate flow for the reports (with > out having to have a seperate sitemap in this case). This seems > to me "natural" thing one might wish to do, rather than "complex" > thing. :)
I second that - it would feel natural. ...but having a "default" flow and "overriding" sounds like FS. > Of course one could specify all the required flows(js functions) in > one script, but for the purposes of readability, scalability, and SoC, > I thought it might "nice"(although not essential) to have the option of > being able to split up the flow within the sitemap. If we don't support to split up flows within a sitemap this might give the user/developer the burden of creating sitemaps where he wouldn't usually create one - just for SoC. > Since, as you know, cocoon sitemaps can already be broken up into smaller > conceptional sections called pipelines, I thought maybe we could have > the option of splitting up flows at the same level. hm... I don't really see the connection between pipeline and flow internally but from a user's point of view this might be ok :-/ This reminds me a little on the term "mounting flowmaps" like it was used ages ago - maybe a mounting should really be considered... so it could be mounted within a matcher? since usually a flow is uri related? -- Torsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
