On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 09:48:15AM -0500, Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > >Michael Melhem wrote: > > > > > >>I recall suggesting map:pipe in an earlier discussion because it > >>would confirm to "noun-verb" convention that already exists in > >>the sitemap. > >> > > ... the only problem being that also pipe is a noun, it does not mean > "somebody who makes pipelines". Currently, generator is "somebody who > generates", transformer is "somebody who transforms", etc. > > But "pipe" noun does not describe an actor, "pipe" is passive... "Piper" > could be better but it means "somebody who plays pipe"...
Yes generally "pipe" is a noun...but how about "to pipe something through" in this context it would be a verb .... but i was never very good at grammer anyway :P. Regards, Michael > > > Vadim > > > >>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=103642811405234&w=2 > >> > >>However, there the issue of "backwards compatibly" as Torsten points > >>out. > >> > >> > >> > >Okay, we *could* (don't know right now if it's good) deprecate > >the 2.0.x map:pipelines and map:pipeline and allow for a transition > >period both versions for defining pipelines: map:pipeline and > >map:pipe. > >And the in 2.1 newly introduced components are then map:pipelines > >resp. map:pipeline. > >At least this would be consistent. > > > >What do you think? > > > >Carsten > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
