Ross Gardler wrote:
Again, this is not meant as a criticism, it is an observation. I made
the observation because Gregor had clearly found himself in the middle
of one of these *seemingly* complex examples and it was ringing alarm
bells for him. He was quite rightly asking should he turn them off or
was there a real issue.
The example in question is:
<forrest:views xmlns:forrest="http://apache.org/forrest/templates/1.0";
xmlns:logic="http://apache.org/forrest/logic/1.0";>
<logic:filter value="dirCut" parameter="p">
<forrest:view format="inx" />
</logic:filter>
<logic:filter value="actorCut" parameter="p">
<forrest:view format="inx" />
</logic:filter>
This has a "logic" namespace, I believe it is that namespace that
started alarm bells ringing. The term logic implies there is programming
in this config file. Now I do know enough about views to know you are
not doing programming in their config files, but Gregor (I assume) does
not know this yet. I was trying to reassure him, but in the process I
seem to have upset you. Sorry.
indeed, the logic in there was a large part of my alarm bells. i brought
this up because there has been a lot of talk about plugins / lenya
resource types and how they could interact / share, and views seem to be
a crucial part for this (very desirable) feature.
i wanted to make sure views solve more problems than they create ;)
I'm sorry that you took my original mail as being criticism of your
excellent work. It was not intended as personal comment, only
reassurance to Gregor that his concerns were, in my opinion, unfounded.
it seems the community is now tackling the concerns that i had, which is
very good.
-gregor
