> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Hi team,
>
> We all agree to add module-based sitemap variables, but we didn't came
> to a consensus about it's syntax. So let's vote to make a choice. To
> illustrate each possible syntax, I will consider the substitution of
the
> "foo" request parameter using the "request" InputModule.
>
> Here are the various syntaxes that people have proposed so far :
>
> 1 : {request:foo}
+1
> 2 : {/request:foo}
+0
> 3 : {module:request:foo}
-0.5
> 4 : {/module:request:foo}
-1
> 5 : {module://request/foo}
-1, unnecessarily verbose
Vadim
> My +1 goes to (1) : I don't see the need to explicitly specify
> "module:", just as we don't prefix URLs with "source:" or "url:" to
> specify if they should be handled by a SourceFactory or URLFactory.
And
> if one day we add another mechanism to InputModules, the choice will
be
> the job of a variable resolver, just at it is today's job of the
> SourceResolver for URLs.
>
> In order to have a more formal definition of sitemap variables, I
> suggest that we consider unprefixed variables to belong to a builtin
> "sitemap" module, which can be named explicitely, for example if the
> variable name contains a colon, e.g. "{sitemap:foo:bar}".
>
> Please place your votes !
>
> Sylvain
>
> --
> Sylvain Wallez
> Anyware Technologies Apache Cocoon
> http://www.anyware-tech.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
