On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Joerg Heinicke wrote: > Reinhard Pötz wrote: > > As I have been confused by all those suggestions you can find a summary > > here: > > http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=FlowSitemapIntegration > > Cool summary, really helps a lot. And here the cool voting matrix :) > > > | A | B | C | D | E | > ----|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| > | | | | | | > V1 | -1 | +0 | +0 | +.5 | +1 | > | | | | | | > V2 | +1 | -1 | -0 | +.5 | -1 | > | | | | | | > V3 | ?? | +.5 | -1 | \ | \ | > | | | | | | > V4 | \ | -1 | -0 | \ | \ | > | | | | | | > V5 | \ | +1 | +.5 | \ | \ | > | | | | | | > V6 | \ | \ | -1 | \ | \ | > | | | | | | > V7 | \ | \ | +1 | \ | \ | > | | | | | | > ----|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| > > > What is the difference between A V1 and A V2? Only the <map:flows/>? And > what does it mean? > > B V5 was missing. From Marc's answer I guess he meant this, but chooses V1.
Don't you think that this makes the voting really difficult ;-) A: V1 B: V2 C: V1 with flow instead of type D: V2 E: V2 BTW, I think it too early to vote on this. If I must decide now, all will be carved in stone. I think we should leave A-C as it is for 2.1. And postpone the discussion to the post-2.1-era. For my part, I must have first two implementations to find more generalized contract, which we don't have at this point. So my vote would like: Should we postpone the generalisation to the post-2.1-era, and hazard with the consequences, that we maybe change the sitemap syntax of a released version of Cocoon? +1 Stephan.
