> I am definitely not keen on doing this for first class components i.e. > fsm-input all out, but it might be worthwhile to make an exception for the > rdc:template (given it is a rapid prototyping tool).
I agree as well, but if we allow it for one, we should allow it for all of them, at least for consistency. As a developer, I would scratch my head in bewilderment if grammar-list only worked as a config element for one rdc. The best we can do is encourage best practices when it comes to this type of development, and leave it to the developer to learn from his mistakes. (some of us never learn) On 8/24/05, Rahul P Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shane Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/23/2005 03:07:00 PM: > > Hey Folks, > > > > Using RDC's, I am wondering why the template for "rapid atomic > > development" requires the grammar attribute? > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs/sandbox/doc/rdc-doc/index.html#template > <snip/> > > Hi Shane - > > We have moved, the current version of the above URL is [ > http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs/doc/rdc-doc/index.html#template ] - > notice the lack of the path fragment "sandbox/". Heads up, the older > version will soon disappear. Now to your question ... :-) > > > > > I like many others prefer to use inline grammars, and in this case > > would like to load my grammars in with my config file. Would it be > > possible to add another rdc:get-configuration xpath expansion in > > fsm-input.tag? I would recommend it goes right before the expansion > > for your prompt list: > > > > <rdc:expand> > > <rdc:get-configuration xml="${model.configuration}" > > locator="/config/${stateNode}/grammar-list/grammar"/> > > </rdc:expand> > > > > This way, inside the <input></input> tags of my config file, I can > > specify the grammar to use for that rdc, without having to have a > > seperate grxml file. If there is grammar listed in the configs, it > > would add it to the list. I believe that you could still specify > > another grammar in the template grammar attribute and have them both > > active, when necessary. > > > > Thoughts? > <snap/> > > The downside: > 1) The config file has growing responsibilities > 2) Grammars can range from miniscule to large, and some may be of the > opinion that non-trivial grammars are best maintained standalone > 3) You take away from the grammar author the ability to use grammar > editors and grammar testing tools out of the box > > I am definitely not keen on doing this for first class components i.e. > fsm-input all out, but it might be worthwhile to make an exception for the > rdc:template (given it is a rapid prototyping tool). > > If you want to push on this for the rdc:template, please create a bugzilla > [ http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/ ] ticket, attaching a patch if you > have one. Oh, is there anything I can help with as far as creating a > ticket for the earlier patch you authored about the rdc:select1 options > (if you have a svn client, you're all set). I'd like to get that in before > I (we) forget. > > -Rahul > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
