Hi thanks all,
Glad to know my understanding wasn't off the mark, my code terminology
might have been pseudo code, but the meaning was accurate!
Paul Noden
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Tobias Bocanegra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/18/08, Paul Noden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Janandith,
>>
>> I think I misunderstood what sling:include does slightly, it seems
>> sling:include is only designed to include different scripts for the
>> same resource, useful if you have broken your output into several
>> scripts driven by selectors..
> no, that's actually only the secondary purpose of the sling:include
> primarily it is used to include other resources, eg in a loop:
>
> for (Iterator<Resource> iter = resolver.listChildren(resource);
> iter.hasNext();) {
> %><sling:include resource="<%= iter.next() %>" /><%
> }
>
> or to get an alternative rendition of another resource:
>
> <sling:include path="/my/news/page" replaceSelectors="teaser" />
>
> or to force a resource type e.g. if the path does not exist:
>
> <sling:include path="/content/en" resourceType="myapp/basic" />
>
>> What i had imagined was that sling:include would have a resource="a/b"
>> option.
> it does. but either as a "path" string, or a "resource" object.
>
>> Such that you could create three nodes:
>>
>> with a property of resourceType = foo
>> a/b
>> a/c
>>
>> with a property of resourceType = bar
>> a/d
>>
>>
>> create three scripts:
>> apps\foo\foo.jsp
>> apps\foo\selector.jsp
>> apps\bar\bar.jsp
>>
>>
>> and in bar.jsp use <sling:include resource="a/b"
>> addSelectors="selector"/> etc...
> yes. but like this:
> <sling:include path="/a/b"> addSelectors="selector"/>
>
>> Relevance to resourcetype is that you can set forceResourceType="foo"
>> such that if you are working on a script being processed on node a/d
>> and you want it to adopt the same processing stream as a/b or a/c i.e.
>> a 'foo' resource then you can choose to force it to use this
>> alternative path.
>>
>> Bertrand - how would you include different resources into your script,
>> and should I be using "resource" whenever I have used "nodes"? I
>> noticed I have managed to use both in a similar context... sorry.
>
> regards, toby
>
