Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Hi all,
We started to use the new widget libraries today, and encountered a
number of semantic issues, mainly related to difficulties to clearly
map names to concepts.
To use libraries, we currently have at hand:
- <fd:import> to make a library available for reuse in the current
form (or library) definition.
- <fd:expand> to import a widget defined in a library in the current
definition
- <fd:class> to define a group of widgets with no surrounding container
- <fd:new> to expand the contents of a <fd:class> in the current
container
These names make it very difficult to understand what does what. I'd
like therefore to propose a renaming:
- rename <fd:class> to <fd:macro> (this is the wording used on the
wiki [1][2])
- rename <fd:new> to <fd:expand>: "expanding" is the word used
traditionally to denote insertion of the macro contents at the
current location.
- rename <fd:import> to <fd:load-library>, to clearly indicate that
widgets in the library are made available but not inserted right now,
in contrast with <jx:import> in JXTG that executes the imported
template.
+1 to all three proposals
- rename <fd:expand> to <fd:insert> (or <fd:use>?)
For this last item, it has to be noted that it is equivalent to an
"untyped extension", i.e.
<fd:insert ref="lib:myfield"/>
is equivalent to
<fd:field extends="lib:myfield"/>
if of course "myfield" is a field.
do we really need it then? I could live with <fd:field
extends="lib:myfield"/> only :-)
Sure. <fd:insert> adds a little more convenience you don't extend the
widget (see my answer to Helma).
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://people.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
