Hi, Well, that's good to know. I certainly can see why you might want this feature; I still don't think it's that interesting, mostly because it's just (potentially) a performance-optimizer as opposed to adding functionality that's not already doable.
With that said, if you or anyone else wants to actually implement this feature and send me the patch, I'll most likely add it to the code. -Yaron On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 6:17 PM, John McClure <[email protected]>wrote: > > Sorry about the tone, Yoren, truly no offense intended at all. No > doubt about it, you're doing fantastic work! for the open source > community, and my appreciation and respect for your work is > practically boundless. The problem though is that I laid out concrete > reasoning for what seems like a small change -- a no-null-call option > -- based on requirements that I *don't* think are manifestly unique at > all. I did detect from your replies pushback centered on whether my > class design is -- I don't know -- 'right' in your opinion. > > For instance you said "a page cannot be considered a country unless it > has a population specified; that's what mandatory fields are for" but > the problem is that if a class (template) is optional-by-design for a > page, then ALL its fields need to be optional; you see, with the > current SF design, a mandatory field in a template makes the template > mandatory for the page, too! This unfortunately directly defeats the > "optional-by-design" method. Again, this design method -- establishing > classes that can optionally be applied to type a resource -- is not at > all unusual; in fact, IMHO it's a best practice for ontology design, > as it neatly bundles similar properties together in a single class, > yielding an ontology that is demonstrably easier to maintain and to > understand. > > Sure I am using #if statements in my templates to identify the > presence of args -- they would still need to be there even with a no- > null-call option. Agreed, it's not a performance drain if used in the > small. In the large though I think it's a definite drain. Say for > instance that I have identified 100+ classes (as I have) that can > optionally type a given page -- without the no-null-call option, then > these 100+ optional-but-not-used-blank-template calls are in the > source (confusing to anyone who looks at the source) and are uselessly > executed by the wiki prior to page display. That worries me alot, and > I do wish this can be more interesting to you now. I don't think I'm > asking for anything that's stupid. I'm simply trying to implement > classes/categories that can optionally type a page. If you have a > different method for me, great. > > Thanks. Again, my apologies for any unintended tonal qualities. > Sometimes I'm a little deaf :) > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Semantic Forms" 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/semantic-forms?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
