On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 09:09:21AM -0500, Ben Young wrote:
> Hey Jeff,
>
> I've got cocoon-2.1 CVS up and running. I'm getting ready to play with
> some of the LinkRewriter stuff. I think the semantic linking will be a
> huge help in certain areas of our site. I'm glad I can continue to use
> the
Hey Jeff,
I've got cocoon-2.1 CVS up and running. I'm getting ready to play with
some of the LinkRewriter stuff. I think the semantic linking will be a
huge help in certain areas of our site. I'm glad I can continue to use
the "old" relative linking too.
I'm still trying to figure out the cleanes
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 03:22:53PM -0500, Ben Young wrote:
> Ok, Jeff. I've been pondering this site.xml thing all day.
Btw, the LinkRewriterTransformer is currently only in 2.1. Although as
the InputModules it depends on are also in 2.0.4, it could be ported
fairly easily.
> BTW, thanks for the
> how many entries does site.xml have?
none yet. 8o) I would need to have one available for each "concept" (page, partial
page, directory) that I want the content managers to be able to link to.
> Is it because of semantic linking or because you want them in the navigation?
It's mainly because of
Ok, Jeff. I've been pondering this site.xml thing all day. BTW, thanks for the
upgrade suggestion. 8o) I have a couple questions about semantic linking that
maybe you can field.
I don't want to give up the "old" linking method just yet, but I would like to use
semantic linking for certain scena
Jeff Turner wrote, On 11/02/2003 5.14:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 02:09:17PM -0500, Ben Young wrote:
...
I've looked into the Forrest site.xml work and I like it for the most
part, but the thought of managing a single navigational map for an
entire 7,000+ page site seems a bit unruly.
Ouch.. ye
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 02:09:17PM -0500, Ben Young wrote:
> Sorry Jeff, I guess I never gave an example of the what the proposed pipeline should
>look like.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
And doesn't it work? What is the output just before the cinclude?
(sorry, I still hav
Sorry Jeff, I guess I never gave an example of the what the proposed pipeline should
look like.
I've looked into the Forrest site.xml work and I like it for the most part, but the
thought of managing a single navigational map for an entire 7,000+ page site seems a
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 09:00:19PM -0500, Ben Young wrote:
> I've recently attempted to use the cinclude to aggregate some files that I'm
> currently aggregating with the map:aggregate command, but I've run into some
> "issues" that I'm not sure how to resolve.
>
> My current map:match section loo
