On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Guido Casper wrote:
> Stephan Michels wrote: > > At least, we should agree on one name > > > > SourceHierarchyGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/hierachy/1.0 > > SourceCollectionGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/collection/1.0 > > SourceDirectoryGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/directory/1.0 > > > > or DirectoryGenerator. > > Probably I should shut up and sit down before adding yet another opinion but > FWIW I prefer DirectoryGenerator. It's most user-friendly (immediately > understood by everyone) and compatible. I can already imagine: > > "What the heck is SourceHierarchyGenerator" > "A DirectoryGenerator for other sources as well" > :-) > > I see no strong reason to rename DirectoryGenerator just because now it > operates on other sources as well. It is semantically as correct as the > other. > > The next step is renaming FileGenerator? Although this would even make more > sense. But given that these components will mostly be used for the > filesystem for a long time to come ... +1, KISS like. DirectoryGenerator and FileGenerator. 99% of the used sources are files. And I don't think backward compatibility is here a must have. Stephan.
