On Aug 11, 2009, at 4:56 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: > > On Aug 11, 2009, at 4:17 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > >> Vincent Massol wrote: >>> On Aug 11, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: >>>>> Q: Is the macro name appropriate? Do you know of a better one? >>>> Point taken: formula is better than equation. Actually, initially >>>> it >>>> was >>>> named "formula", but I didn't like it that much. Anyway, the >>>> community >>>> has spoken. >>>> >>>> Point not taken: rendering is the right name IMO. Before xwiki- >>>> rendering >>>> as a syntax converter, rendering has a widely accepted sense as >>>> generating raster graphics. From Wikipedia: "Rendering is the >>>> process of >>>> generating an image from a model, by means of computer programs". >>>> This >>>> is what the module does, and the fact that we have another thing >>>> called >>>> "rendering" doesn't mean that we must invent new names for >>>> something >>>> standard. >>> >>> I'd agree to use rendering but *only* if: >>> >>> * It's integrated inside the xwiki-rendering module >>> * It's implemented as a XWiki Parser and Renderer (and thus we >>> introduce a syntax for it) >>> >>> I think it could fit well in the xwiki-rendering module. We'll >>> need to >>> adjust a few things (since it would be the first renderer to >>> generate >>> binary data) but that's a good thing. >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> Well, it doesn't actually do parsing or rendering. The code is really >> small, and it just forwards the text to a service, which returns the >> binary blob. >> >> But I don't understand why do you insist on this conflict between >> image >> rendering and text rendering? > > I'd really prefer that we call it xwiki-formula meaning that it > contains APIs for formula manipulation (even if right now the only > API we offer is one that generates an image). Same as we have xwiki- > chart for manipulating charts. > > Rendering has a strong connotation in xwiki land. It means > http://code.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Modules/RenderingModule > > + the name is pretty long and ungainly (it seems nicer to me to keep > module names as short as possible) > > After more thinking I don't think it fits as a Renderer since the > main idea of a Parser/Renderer is that you parse with any parser and > you're able to use any renderer. This wouldn't be the case here.
Should the formula macro be in the xwiki-formula module (as a sub module for ex)? Or should it be in the rendering module? I think as we progress through componentization it should be in xwiki-formula so that we have self isolated modules that can be used as is. This would remove deps between the rendering module and xwiki-formula for ex. So as soon as a business domain materializes, everything related to that domain should find its way inside the module for that domain IMO ok I give in :) so I would see: xwiki-formula/ L– xwiki-formula-renderer |_ xwiki-formula-macro and xwiki-chart/ |_ xwiki-chart-renderer |_ xwiki-chart-macro wdyt? Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
