On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Dennis Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It would be nice to deprecate the use of <include> as a child of <views>, > but that use is far too entrenched to make sense anymore. A more practical > remedy would be to deprecate the use of <include> as a child of <modelglue> > since this use is much rarer, and replace it with a new synonym element. The > equivalent XML element in ColdSpring is <import>, so that would be my first > choice. > After looking at the source, I found that <include> already has a synonym element; it's called <module>. However, modules and includes do not function completely identically: all modules tags are processed before any includes, and a module tag may have a type attribute. The type attributes defines the loader to use for the module, but the only supported type so far (XML) is associated with the same loader used for includes. > > Now that you mentioned the Model-Glue XML Reference, I noticed a number of > other minor errors and omissions there. I'll start reviewing it and apply > fixes as I see them. > I've added the <view> and <module> elements to the reference, as well as adding some support information for Model-Glue 3 and actionpacks. Cheers, -- Dennis
-- Model-Glue Sites: Home Page: http://www.model-glue.com Documentation: http://docs.model-glue.com Bug Tracker: http://bugs.model-glue.com Blog: http://www.model-glue.com/blog You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "model-glue" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/model-glue?hl=en
