Is this even still a vote?  It seems that it has devolved into a conversation.
Perhaps a change in title will get more people in on the conversation--or
perhaps turning it into an RT would help.

Being drakonian on messages with [VOTE] in the title will make it clear if we
are still voting or not.  I don't even know what the outcome of the vote was.


Guido Casper wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

On 7 Nov 2003, at 13:52, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:


Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:


On Thursday, Nov 6, 2003, at 14:39 Europe/Rome, Vadim Gritsenko
wrote:


I agree with comments in this other thread that let's not introduce
nested components in <map:call/>. Instead, if needed, let's
introduce <act type="flow"/>. Sometime later.


-1


Your -1 means: "replace later with never", right? Just to remove any
possible point of confusion :)

yes. I am against the silly


 <xxx>
  ... do something if true
 </xx>
 .. do something if false

syntax. doesn't matter what the logic that drives the "xxx" tag is or
what "xxx" is remapped to.


Wow, that would rule out matchers as well.
But it might make some sense since matchers are not all that different to
actions ;-)

Guido








Reply via email to