Having information required in the 'middle' of a filename is very
non-standard. So, if we can't remove it at all, then I guess I am not
in favor of renaming them at all.
Seeing "foo.channel" I'm more inclined to think I have to keep the file
named "*.channel". If I see a file named "foo.channel.xml", I might
assume I can change everything but the .xml extension. Especially when
you consider the redundancies in the other places.
---- Cris J H
On 03/21/2011 02:00 PM, Eric Dalquist wrote:
If we remove it we would have to do one of two things.
1. Absolutely require the directory structure currently in use be used
ALL the time.
2. Parse all the XML files twice, once to determine the root element and
sort the data files then again to do the import.
The order that the data is imported is VERY important and the primary
use of those secondary extensions.
Eric
On 3/21/11 3:47 PM, Cris J Holdorph wrote:
If you're going to rename them, is there a significant reason to even
leave the '.channel' in the middle? To me this always felt like an
unneeded complication when the 'type' was in the XML content to begin
with. And in the case of uPortals own set of entity files it has them
in subdirectories. So we had the type in THREE places (filename,
directory name, xml content).
---- Cris J H
On 03/15/2011 05:30 PM, Drew Wills wrote:
+1
This is a good practice -- I agree completely.
drew
On 3/14/2011 5:46 PM, Eric Dalquist wrote:
renaming the entity files in trunk by adding .xml to the end? So
IdentitySwapper.channel would become IdentitySwapper.channel.xml I
think it might back life a little easier if editors recognize these
files as XML by default.
--
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
