On Tue, 21 May 2002, Tod Harter wrote: > Its perfectly sensible, no different really from the line numbers in old > BASIC programs... (not that you young whippersnappers would remember that... > ;o).
Oh yah, I remember, I'm not all that young. But there are only 20 lines or so in my pipeline definitions now and I don't expect them to grow. > Obviously your numbers would benefit from following some convention. > Personally I was thinking it would be more handy to be able to "tag" every > stylesheet somehow in your config file/PI and then you could specify which > ones are to be used in a request with tag=whatever. Its basically just > extending the stylechooser's use of the title attribute in PIs. You could > even create named pipelines, something like: You may remember from my other postings that I'm pretty anti-PI. I dislike how it effectively ends up putting presentation information inside a presentation-data-free XML file. But anyway, yeah, I do use a convention: global page-init stuff is 0-10, the work to build the page data is 11-99, and the global page-finish stuff is 100+. If I use numbers, it allows me to say "stop once we get past number X", and avoid the problems inherent with saying "stop when you get to rule ABC" and ABC's been deleted. > <pipeline name="x"> > ... > </pipeline> > > and then pick and choose the one you wanted with a URL parameter, etc. > Obviously that would subsume the functionality of passthru (with an empty > pipeline). I sorta have that in the pipeline definition, only it's all based on the root tag, AxKit-style. The per-page XSL ends up building a page with <page>, <adminpage> or <sect1> as the root tag...and this ends up running the "regular page", "admin page" or "docbook page" transformation, respectively. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
