On Dec 28, 2006, at 3:08 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
As you can see there was a quite gradual divergence from the original
concept to what we have today. IMO it would be preferable to just use
the word "block" in one of the two uses of the the word.
+100. Please, please, yes.
I really think that "block" should be reserved for the new "Block"
things!
As we have used the term block for the container aspect for so long we
probably have keep that (although "plugin" probably would be easier to
understand for outsiders).
To me, the term "plugin" has a distinct connotation: that of something
conforming to some "plugin API" published by the hosting framework,
like in Eclipse or Maven. In Cocoon, with the 2.1-style "blocks" there
is (as Reinhard said) no contract in view at all, and in the new Blocks
when we speak of the block "contract" we mean the block-specific
contract that expresses the service(s) provided by the block, right?
IIUC, the "interface" that makes a Block function like a plugin is not
an API at all, rather it's the structure+content "conventions" (e.g.
COB-INF, etc.) that you spoke of... is that correct? In that case, I
don't see "plugin" as a natural term to apply to either the old-skool
"blocks" or the c2.2 "Blocks". I think "plugin" has the potential to
engender more confusion than it alleviates... :-/
IMHO, going forward the things like CForms, Ajax, Batik etc. should no
longer be called "blocks" at all... rather they should be called
"optional modules", because that's all they are. They are Maven
"modules", and they are "optional" because you have the choice whether
or not to name them in your POM (in 2.1, blocks were "optional" because
you had the choice whether or not to build them, but... that was then,
this is now! :-). Even though these were called "blocks" before, I
don't think that should stand in the way of this nomenclature shift.
If all of a sudden we start talking about the "CForms module" instead
of the "CForms block", that's not going to cause anybody's brain to
melt. It's pretty obvious what is going on and people will pick up the
change readily. Right now we have core/ and blocks/; I would propose
renaming the "blocks" directory to "optional", changing the
nomenclature in the docs, and the text of the "Block Samples" section
of the samples page rewritten (that's horribly out of date and was in
need of a rewrite even in 2.1!)
Don't you love nomenclature changes? [1]
Cheers,
—ml—
[1] — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_who_say_Ni
