Shane Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/24/2005 03:59:08 PM: > > 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) <snip/>
The rdc:template was moved out of the "component" sections of the tag docs a couple of weeks ago (you'll notice the change on the new link I sent in my last email). I thought it was important to stress that a rdc:template instance is not a first class RDC. There truly is an important distinction between component tags and the rdc:template - the latter is a higher order function of sorts, if the atomic RDCs are a first order function. Template instances give us more freedom, along with handing us more responsibility. So in my mind, there is no breach of consistency. But I do value your opinion, and that is possibly how other developers and users think as well. In which case, from a framework perspective, we're better off doing nothing here. -Rahul
