On 21.Nov.2002 -- 11:05 AM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> This document defines this concept of "pipeline service", which, as we
> will see, consists in using pipelines as sitemap components (generator,
> transformer and serializer). It is separated from the blocks design
> document since pipeline services can be used without blocks, even if
> they will be mostly useful in that context.
This sounds very natural to me. And as most of it is already possible
with a somewhat strange syntax I have mostly concerns with the
proposed new syntax.
>
> Q: I want do define a pipeline that will be used only as a
> transformation service. Why must I write a <map:generate> and a
> <map:serialize> in its definition ?
>
> A: Because the sitemap, as a pipeline building language, must be able to
> determine the start of a pipeline and its end, even if not all its
> components are used. Like opening and closing braces in Java, the
> generator begins the pipeline definition and the serializer ends it.
We have the notion of pipelines in the sitemap. Today they are only
used to get different error handlers. Maybe we should rethink this and
use the map:pipeline as boundaries.
Another idea would be to place those pipelines acting as generator,
transformer, serializer in the same part as we do with other
components of that kind. Problem would be that they would need to use
other components just introduced there.
A last thought: would it be necessary to have those pipelines match a
pattern or would it be sufficiant to have them names?
Chris.
--
C h r i s t i a n H a u l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fingerprint: 99B0 1D9D 7919 644A 4837 7D73 FEF9 6856 335A 9E08
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
