On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 10:43, Marc Portier wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Marc Portier wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
- if we allow "fi:styling" in the definition (which is needed IMO), we must still retain the possibility to override it in the template. The associated logic on the template side will be much more easy to implement.didn't think of this yet,
in any case we will need some overriding/merging rules for the @defines/@extends thing as well, I guess similar ones should apply for letting template override its definnition on certain fields
Just curious: are you planning on doing the "extending" by merging the
definitions on the XML level?
Sounds weird... I would better consider this by having the definition with @extend delegate some calls to the definition it extends.
Sylvain
-- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
