Daniel Fagerstrom pisze:
Reinhard Poetz skrev:
definitly. For the use cases that *I* have, a generator will be good
enough - I don't think that I need a source for them:
<map:generate type="servlets" src="data/myconfig.xml"/>
This could return something like this:
<servlets>
<service-A>
<config>...</config>
</service->
<service-B>
<config>...</config>
</service-B>
</servlets>
What are the usecases for implementing a servlets: protocol at all?
(Maybe I'm overlooking something important here ...)
In the above output from your generator, you need to reference the
actual resources of the listed servlet services. And to be able to do
that you need an URI. And right now we have not any protocol that is
suitable for that.
>
For the use case we are discussing, the assumption is that the caller of
the servlets generator is not connected to all the servlet services.
Thus we cannot use the servlet: protocol that by design assumes an
explicit named connection.
But we already agreed to implement referencing by block id in servlet: source,
right?
So we need a protocol that allows (webapp) global servlet service URIs
anyway. And then we could as well make it listable as a source is usable
in more contexts than a generator.
I think it's time to support Reinhard :-)
I agree with his opinion that servlets: source is not needed at the moment and generator will be sufficient. I didn't like servlets: source
from the beginning and that was the reason why I wanted to integrate it's planned functionality with servlet: source.
Having a source that is listable only for one URL (servlets:/) is awkward idea
IMO.
--
Grzegorz Kossakowski
http://reflectingonthevicissitudes.wordpress.com/
