Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 14:31:09 -0600, Judson Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think we can have a distinction between an exit page and a > > "normal" page. In fact you can have pages that have both exit > > links, and returning links. The distinction between the pages in > > not in the

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Wednesday 02 January 2002 07:27 pm, you wrote: > Hi Judson, and Happy New Year! > Back atcha, Ovidiu! All the best in 2002! > [I've Cc-ed the mailing list as well.] I've been following the list with some ardor, so I'll be CCing you with my response. > > > > > But at the same time, would it

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Hi Judson, and Happy New Year! [I've Cc-ed the mailing list as well.] I hope this reply does not come too late ;-), but I left on holidays the day after you sent the message, and didn't have time to respond to it. On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:28:57 -0600, Judson Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > O

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Judson Lester wrote: > > On Wednesday 19 December 2001 10:51 am, Stefano wrote: > > > Good point. > > > > Anyway, as long as those servlets are used as "actors" (mean they don't > > return a stream, but beans), otherwise we'll end up having to parse this > > stream to make it fit into the pipeli

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Wednesday 19 December 2001 03:49 pm, you wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:57:22 -0600, Judson Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a) If you look closely at the get-user function, you will notice an > interesting fact, which is a non-local exit to a totally different > context, in case the user

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:41:58 -0600, Judson Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I recall criticisms about business logic in the flowmap, and encouraging > > > the use of Servlets in this way would help, I think. > > > > I personally came to the conclusion that once you have continuations, > >

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:57:22 -0600, Judson Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rereading that post in the context of later messages, it comes across much > more clearly, and a couple of thoughts occur to me. > > One: in accepting the idea of a flowmap, are we committed to abandoning other > Se

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Wednesday 19 December 2001 10:51 am, Stefano wrote: > Good point. > > Anyway, as long as those servlets are used as "actors" (mean they don't > return a stream, but beans), otherwise we'll end up having to parse this > stream to make it fit into the pipeline and then a ServletGenerators > woul

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Judson Lester wrote: > > Rereading that post in the context of later messages, it comes across much > more clearly, and a couple of thoughts occur to me. > > One: in accepting the idea of a flowmap, are we committed to abandoning other > Servlets? Good point. Anyway, as long as those servlet

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

giacomo wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:11:17 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:14:10 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources (plus Cocoon/Scheme update)

Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > I couldn't find a way to teach the concept of apply-templates that could > > resonate with them, probably because the concept of explicit recursion > > is too far away from their mindsets (in fact, XSLT xsl:apply-templates > > is very close to Scheme call-with-current-co

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Rereading that post in the context of later messages, it comes across much more clearly, and a couple of thoughts occur to me. One: in accepting the idea of a flowmap, are we committed to abandoning other Servlets? Moreover, is there an advantage to avoiding the use of the Servlet scopes (not

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:11:17 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:14:10 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > IMHO don't use XML to

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:11:17 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:14:10 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language. > > > > > > And IMHO we h

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > giacomo wrote: > > > > IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language. > > > > And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to > > describe a flowmap (and this thread *is* about flowmaps): > > Good, we finally hit the proble

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:14:10 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language. > > > > And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to > > describe a flowmap (and this thre

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources (plus Cocoon/Scheme update)

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:40:06 +0300, "Mikhail Fedotov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In fact, if you look at the semantics, XSLT is pure functional > > language, admitely with no possibility of defining new functions > > at runtime. > > Check out > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/xsl-list/2001-11/

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: maandag 17 december 2001 10:47 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > Ovidiu showed us flowmaps written with a java syntax as examples of the > su

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

giacomo wrote: > > IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language. > > And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to > describe a flowmap (and this thread *is* about flowmaps): Good, we finally hit the problem. Yes, this thread is about flowmaps. Ovidiu showed us fl

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources (plus Cocoon/Scheme update)

Hi! > In fact, if you look at the semantics, XSLT is pure > functional > language, admitely with no possibility of defining new > functions at runtime. Check out http://sources.redhat.com/ml/xsl-list/2001-11/msg01096.html Mikhail -

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources (plus Cocoon/Scheme update)

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:24:14 +0100, Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gosh, I love this thread... Me too ;-) > > > Yes, I had the taste of the power of continuations when I dived more > > > into the paper you presented (and implemented myself a few scheme > > > examples to get the

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:14:10 +0100 (CET), giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IMHO don't use XML to create a programming language. > > And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to > describe a flowmap (and this thread *is* about flowmaps): I thought my shopping cart ex

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, giacomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And IMHO we havn't seen the real need for a programming language to > describe a flowmap (and this thread *is* about flowmaps): Has someone posted a workable alternative already then? --

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Gerhard Froehlich wrote: > >From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > >giacomo wrote: > > > >> Well, I have not made myself clear enough. In XML you can control > >> verbosity by DTD/XSchemas/aggreed syntax. The ones controlling the > >> Schemas define the

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

>From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >giacomo wrote: > >> Well, I have not made myself clear enough. In XML you can control >> verbosity by DTD/XSchemas/aggreed syntax. The ones controlling the >> Schemas define the verbosity. In programming language nothing >> prevents you choo

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, MJ Ray wrote: > giacomo wrote: > >said that, using your words, that the "web tech population nowadays" > >understand HTML so there isn't a big step to understand XML and have a > >syntax that is "procedural" to express logic for flowmaps and I meant > >that Scheme isn't popul

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > giacomo wrote: > > > Well, I have not made myself clear enough. In XML you can control > > verbosity by DTD/XSchemas/aggreed syntax. The ones controlling the > > Schemas define the verbosity. In programming language nothing > > prevents you choosing

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

giacomo wrote: >said that, using your words, that the "web tech population nowadays" >understand HTML so there isn't a big step to understand XML and have a >syntax that is "procedural" to express logic for flowmaps and I meant >that Scheme isn't popular in the "web tech population nowadays" sdo I

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

giacomo wrote: > Well, I have not made myself clear enough. In XML you can control > verbosity by DTD/XSchemas/aggreed syntax. The ones controlling the > Schemas define the verbosity. In programming language nothing > prevents you choosing non-verbose names but in XML we control by > Schema the n

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Hi, just another block on the fire ;) Gerhard In the beginning there was nothing... then even *that* exploded!

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Gosh, I love this thread... I do as well (even if I can't spend so much time writing big RT thoughts about it). > > > > Yes, I had the taste of the power of continuations when I dived more > > > into the paper you presented (and implemented myself

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> For the model you described above, you don't need Prolog to implement > it. Since there's no backtracking involved, you can model the > resources as a dependency graph, aka a directed graph. To resolve the > dependencies, just sort it topologically and traverse it > postorder. This is exactly th

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:29:52 -0500, Jason Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So an incomplete summary of what is currently being proposed is as follows: > > --- > Sitemap > --- >Role: handles stateless needs (identified by URI) >Semantics: >Syntax: >Implementation:

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

So an incomplete summary of what is currently being proposed is as follows: --- Sitemap --- Role: handles stateless needs (identified by URI) Semantics: Syntax: Implementation: --- Flowmap --- Role: handles statefull needs (identified by URI with statefull encodin

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >Gosh, I love this thread... Me too. I just wish I could participate more. >The only thing that imposes is the context in the closing brackets. >Something that neiter C/C++/C#/Java/ECMAScript nor Scheme nor Python nor >Perl do. (it's only suggested as good programming p

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Gosh, I love this thread... > > Yes, I had the taste of the power of continuations when I dived more > > into the paper you presented (and implemented myself a few scheme > > examples to get the feeling of it). > > I do like the concept of continuation as well. It gives you a better way > of wri

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > Yes, I had the taste of the power of continuations when I dived more > into the paper you presented (and implemented myself a few scheme > examples to get the feeling of it). I do like the concept of continuation as

RE: [OT] Languages // estas Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

lem? tomK > -Original Message- > From: MJ Ray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: donderdag 13 december 2001 0:20 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OT] Languages // estas Re: [RT] Managing Flow > and Resources > > > Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTE

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

: Steven Noels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: woensdag 12 december 2001 9:45 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Steven Noels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: woensdag 12 december 2001 9:45 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > -Original Message- > > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mail

Re: [OT] Languages // estas Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Unfortunately, in order to communicate, we must have a common knowledge >context and using english reduces the energy required to have these >communities. This is a limit, I know this very well myself, but I can't >see any better solution. :( I'll jus

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: woensdag 12 december 2001 14:57 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > Steven Noels wrote: > > > With all due respect: Namespaces were

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Steven Noels wrote: > With all due respect: Namespaces were really an afterthought for XML, and this > clearly shows. Granted. In fact, SGML compatibility for XML turned out to be more harmful than useful. :( -- Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be

Re: [OT] Languages // estas Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

MJ Ray wrote: > >> Projects like Apache are pointed up as examples of meritocracy in action, > >> but what is meritocratic about giving people an advantage based on their > >> native tongue? > >Sorry, I can't parse this (you know, native tongue impedence mismatch) > > I think this may be subtle

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: dinsdag 11 december 2001 10:08 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources What an amusing gathering of ex-collaegues :-) > However, XML allows y

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: dinsdag 11 december 2001 0:36 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > SGML vs XML had nothing to do with it? > > Oh, absolutely, DSSSL wor

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

- Original Message - From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:19 PM Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > > > - Original Message -

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:08 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECT

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

es, and i am sure he will realises this in the (near?) future also ;-) There is only one way to write good code and that is whitout a deadline in sight. Sven On 11 Dec 2001 at 14:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRe

[OT] Languages // estas Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >> I would say that it is perfectly fair, but would ask you in my best (still >> very bad) Italian that we use the most common neutral language instead. >This is exactly my point. You know, I'm not sure it is. >> Projects like Apache are pointed up as examples of meritoc

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: dinsdag 11 december 2001 14:40 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Tom Klaas

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Berin Loritsch wrote: > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > Berin Loritsch wrote: > > > >>However, this does bring up a valid point about the > >>pipelines as they stand: > >> > >>It would be great to have valid pipelines that do not specify > >>the source document in the generato

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:03 PM > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > >

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

MJ Ray wrote: > > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >> The schemer would say that XML syntax is a huge step backwards from what > >> already existed... ;-) > >Granted :) [in fact, I was told that Guy Steele now uses XML as a > >defense to parethesis frequency in Scheme] > > Like they say, Lispers were

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: dinsdag 11 december 2001 14:40 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > -Original Message- > > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mailto:

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

- Original Message - From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > I think you are oversimplifying: I agree with you that actions and > ac

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >> The schemer would say that XML syntax is a huge step backwards from what >> already existed... ;-) >Granted :) [in fact, I was told that Guy Steele now uses XML as a >defense to parethesis frequency in Scheme] Like they say, Lispers were there decades before most peopl

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:56:39 -0500, Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Berin Loritsch wrote: > > > > > Torsten Curdt wrote: > > > > > > > >>> To be able to incorporate URLs to older points in the processing, the > > >>> send-response() function could retur

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Tom Klaasen (TeleRelay) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > [big fat snip] > However, XML allows you to e

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Berin Loritsch wrote: > >>However, this does bring up a valid point about the >>pipelines as they stand: >> >>It would be great to have valid pipelines that do not specify >>the source document in the generator. In other words, the valid >>pipeline would say use a "Fi

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Berin Loritsch wrote: > I think this has much to do with terminology. Web administrators > and designers do not think in terms of finite state machines. If > they have any concept of programatic logic, it is expressed in terms > of XSLT or CFML, or something similar. Really simple. One way of

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

MJ Ray wrote: > > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >I think not. DSSSL vs. XSLT is a good example of why the lisp-like > >parenthesis syntax in the document-centric world is a bad idea. > > So DSSSL "lost" purely because of parentheses? No, I didn't say this. I just said that one of the things that

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

MJ Ray wrote: > > Torsten Curdt wrote: > >Let's stay with the XML syntax! Otherwise would be a step backwards! > >Maybe we can work out a different way to combine the current sitemap > >with the new flow managing. > > The schemer would say that XML syntax is a huge step backwards from what > alr

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: Steven Noels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: dinsdag 11 december 2001 0:31 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf > Of Ovidiu Predescu > Sent: maandag 10 december 2001 23:12 > To: Berin Loritsch > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > When you have forms who

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:46:15 +0100 (CET), Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > OK, we'll stay with the XML syntax for the sitemap. > > > > > I'd also like to see the flowmap to have XML syntax. I'm still dreaming > > > of developing some visual tools for editing this stuff. This would > >

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:56:39 -0500, Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Berin Loritsch wrote: > > > Torsten Curdt wrote: > > > > >>> To be able to incorporate URLs to older points in the processing, the > >>> send-response() function could return as value an object that contains > >>>

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Berin Loritsch wrote: > Torsten Curdt wrote: > >>> To be able to incorporate URLs to older points in the processing, the >>> send-response() function could return as value an object that contains >>> the URL to its continuation. You can pass this URL in the optional >>> dictionary, as an additi

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Torsten Curdt wrote: >>OK, we'll stay with the XML syntax for the sitemap. >> >> >>>I'd also like to see the flowmap to have XML syntax. I'm still dreaming >>>of developing some visual tools for editing this stuff. This would >>>be WAY easier when everything is XML based!! >>> >>The flowmap is ac

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> OK, we'll stay with the XML syntax for the sitemap. > > > I'd also like to see the flowmap to have XML syntax. I'm still dreaming > > of developing some visual tools for editing this stuff. This would > > be WAY easier when everything is XML based!! > > The flowmap is actually nothing more than

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:00:03 +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >I think not. DSSSL vs. XSLT is a good example of why the lisp-like > >parenthesis syntax in the document-centric world is a bad idea. > > So DSSSL "lost" purely because of parentheses? SGML vs XM

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >I think not. DSSSL vs. XSLT is a good example of why the lisp-like >parenthesis syntax in the document-centric world is a bad idea. So DSSSL "lost" purely because of parentheses? SGML vs XML had nothing to do with it? I think you are over-simplifying. [...] >For examp

Re: [Fwd: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources]

On Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:06:47 +0100, Michael Hartle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > >>Another question, is the current abstraction of a sitemap able to allow > >>different principles of sitemaps (current one, scheme-based one, etc.) > >>the admin/developer can choose fro

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

1:07 > > > To: Berin Loritsch > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Hartle > > > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > > > Regarding the XML syntax of the sitemap, I actually believe it's a lot > > > easier if we just have the sitema

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Torsten Curdt wrote: >Let's stay with the XML syntax! Otherwise would be a step backwards! >Maybe we can work out a different way to combine the current sitemap >with the new flow managing. The schemer would say that XML syntax is a huge step backwards from what already existed... ;-) I think th

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

2001 1:07 > > To: Berin Loritsch > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Hartle > > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > > > Regarding the XML syntax of the sitemap, I actually believe it's a lot > > easier if we just have the sitemap written in Scheme, inst

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 09 Dec 2001 18:24:24 +0100, Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > Anyways, here's the way I see now the whole thing right now. The > > sitemap continues to be the main controlling point. However, the > > result of a matching will no longer be a pipel

[Fwd: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources]

--- Begin Message --- Ovidiu Predescu wrote: >>Another question, is the current abstraction of a sitemap able to allow >>different principles of sitemaps (current one, scheme-based one, etc.) >>the admin/developer can choose from depending on his needs ? E.g., I'd >>use the current sitemap

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > Anyways, here's the way I see now the whole thing right now. The > sitemap continues to be the main controlling point. However, the > result of a matching will no longer be a pipeline, but a Scheme > function invocation. In particular, a pipeline will be defined as a > Sc

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Steven Noels wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: zondag 9 december 2001 1:07 > > To: Berin Loritsch > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Hartle > > Subject: Re: [RT] Managin

RE: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: zondag 9 december 2001 1:07 > To: Berin Loritsch > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Hartle > Subject: Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources > Regarding the XML syntax of the sitemap, I ac

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

On Sun, 09 Dec 2001 01:38:16 +0100, Michael Hartle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > >I'll let you know what's the progress on my work. If anyone is > >interested in seeing intermediate results, I can check the code in the > >scratch-pad CVS area. > > > I am definitely inte

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Ovidiu Predescu wrote: >I'll let you know what's the progress on my work. If anyone is >interested in seeing intermediate results, I can check the code in the >scratch-pad CVS area. > I am definitely interested in seeing your results. I still have problems thinking the right way for Prolog or Sc

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Berin, On Sat, 08 Dec 2001 17:11:38 -0500, Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > > Excellent, this is the Scheme engine I was looking for! > > > > All the engines I knew from a long time ago where written in C, not in > > Java. With these engines interfacing be

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > Excellent, this is the Scheme engine I was looking for! > > All the engines I knew from a long time ago where written in C, not in > Java. With these engines interfacing between Scheme and Java had to go > through a C layer implementing JNI calls, which, as you imagine,

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Excellent, this is the Scheme engine I was looking for! All the engines I knew from a long time ago where written in C, not in Java. With these engines interfacing between Scheme and Java had to go through a C layer implementing JNI calls, which, as you imagine, is very expensive. Thanks, -- Ov

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

You have just provided a great example of something really close to what I was trying to express a while back when I proposed Prolog as a mechanism for "proving" URLs based on some rules, premises, and an inference engine. I don't think that it's exactly the same, but it's *very* similar.

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Berin Loritsch wrote: > "So what does this have to do with Cocoon?" I hear you ask. Good > question! One > of the tools we used to perform these very complex decisions was based > on an open > source project called the Java Expert System Shell (JESS) which can be > found at > http://herzberg

Re: [RT] Managing Flow and Resources

Berin Loritsch wrote: > Such an approach would be interesting to follow > > Have I successfully confused everyone yet? The link to JESS is better > help. This reminds me of Prolog I had to endure in school back then, not defining how to solve the problem, but defining legal steps that ca

[RT] Managing Flow and Resources

There has been a lot of talk about Finite State Machine approaches, Staged Event Driven Architecture (a refinement of the same), Scheme, and more. When I saw the post regarding Scheme it jogged my memory (a few days later). When I was first working for my company, we were developing a really coo