Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I currently run into the problem that I created pipelines which I
> thought were possible, but currently are not support by Cocoon:
>
> It is not possible to nest anything other than a map:part into
> a map:aggregate, so the following doesn't work:
> <map:aggregate>
> <map:select type="test">
> <map:when test="a">
> <map:part src="a"/>
> </map:when>
> <map:otherwise>
> <map:part src="b"/>
> </map:otherwise>
> </map:select>
> <map:part src="constant"/>
> </map:aggregate>
>
> Is this a bug or is this by design?
I didn't partecipate in the design of the 'aggregating' semantics of the
sitemap, but I would think the above is a bug. I don't see why it
shouldn't be possible to use the above since it would be useful in many
situations.
> My personal opinion is, that this should be possible.
I tend to resonate with your vision.
> Another restriction we currently have is already entered as a bug with
> the number 4357: An Action is not possible as a root element inside
> a map:pipeline, only map:match can be a used as a root element.
> So here again, is this by design?
oh, god, this is a big one.
Here the restriction is by design, but I do see the need to question it.
My perception is that this might open to door to a shitload of semantic
changes to adapt to the required flow-map like semantics.
But at the same time, I do see the need for use of match-less actions:
the question is how much of a 'hack' this is.
> I think we shouldn't make such restrictions. But at least if we make
> these restrictions we should document them.
+1 for documenting all the restriction. This is obvious.
-0 for allowing this change before the flowmap semantics are being
worked on. I mean: if you allow something like
<pipeline>
<act name="pre-matching"/>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
</pipeline>
people start doing
<pipeline>
<act name="pre-matching"/>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<act name="post-matching"/>
</pipeline>
and then
<pipeline>
<act name="pre-matching"/>
<match>...</match>
<act name="intra-matching"/>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<act name="post-matching"/>
</pipeline>
but then the question is: is "intra-matching" performed if the first
match is successful?
Placing map:act at the same level of map:match can be perceived as a
design mistake, but might not be since 'matcher' and 'actions' are not
pipeline components since they don't work on the pipeline directly.
So, the options I see are:
1) make it illegal to have unmatched actions
2) encapsulate unmatched actions in defined places
<pipeline>
<pre-matching>
<act>
</pre-matching>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<match>...</match>
<post-matching>
<act>
</post-matching>
</pipeline>
3) make it illegal to have intra-matching actions
[the option of allowing intra-matching actions is, IMO, wrong by design]
The real question is: are those unmatched action useful in real life?
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
