Peter Donald wrote:
> According to your own analysis there is no distinction except for metadata.
Please, define 'component metadata' before I can answer your question.
> > block -> an avalon-lifecycle-aware polymorphic object, versionned,
> >fully reentrant, sharable, not directly referentiable
>
> Thats not entirely accurate. There is no constraint that a block be
> reentrant or sharable nor has there ever been. It is left up to developer
> and assembler to decide these things.
>
> > component -> an avalon-lifecycle-aware polymorphic object, directly
> >referentiable
>
> Leo (A Cocoon developer) saids a killer feature would be to change cocoon
> to not be directly referentiable.
Stefano (another Cocoon developer) asks how this is possible if the
direct referencing of components is hardcoded into the sitemap
semantics.
> Given the above points do you still think there is a non-academic
> distinction between Components and Blocks?
I will answer this after you define 'component metadata'.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
