Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Christian Haul wrote: ...A last thought: would it be necessary to have those pipelines match a pattern or would it be sufficiant to have them names?
After reading it second time... And seems that Christian also has concern about syntax... There are two ways to understand word "pipeline" and Sylvain's proposal.
Vadim, you point out exactly the misunderstanding in which Christian and Gianugo seem to have fallen. My proposal is the first one below : "A la Cocoon source". The "src" attribute is effectively the URI handled by a sitemap, just as the one we use for the "cocoon:" protocol.
The second way ("A la Text Substitution") is based on the use in the names of <map:pipeline>, which doesn't currently exist. IMO, the decomposition of a sitemap in pipelines is an internal matter, and should not used to define the public contract of a sitemap or block.
First Way: A-la Cocoon Source --------------------------------
<snip/>
Second Way: A-la Text Substitution ------------------------------------
<snip/>
Results are the same, but please note the differences.
Implementation via the first way is better named as "cocoon"-type components, second way can be named as "pipeline"-type components.
Good point. Using "cocoon" as the component type certainly helps to understand that the "src" is a sitemap URI. We shall use it from now on.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
