It may not matter much, but I'd prefer to see examples of this without flow. With flow you could just degenerate into a map:call for input and a map:call for output, or perhaps a map:call that does both?
-----Original Message----- From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 8:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RT] Cocoon Input Model Le Mercredi, 25 f�v 2004, � 16:49 Europe/Zurich, Daniel Fagerstrom a �crit : <snip-plenty-of-good-stuff/> > ...But in many cases using SAX based XML as in pipelines is not enough > we need a data structure i.e. DOM. This leads to flowscript components > that reads some input format to DOM and from DOM to some output format > or some store. We also will need flowscript components that go from > DOM to DOM... Just trying to understand from a practical point of view, does this mean something like <map:generate type="request"/> <map:transform src="prepare-query-for-user-preferences"/> <map:transform type="sql"/> <map:call function="myFlow()" dom-input="domIn"/> At which point myFlow() is called with a "domIn" variable containing the current pipeline XML as a DOM? And maybe the opposite: <map:call function="myFlow()" dom-output="domOut"/> meaning that myFlow() is expected to write a DOM structure to domOut for insertion in the pipeline? -Bertrand
