On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 09:28:02AM +0100, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
...
> I think we have currently two approaches:
> a) Chaining is done by special objects, so you have something like
> this (let's not discuss the "first"/"second" syntax):
>
> <map:objects>
> <map:object name="request-param" ..../>
> <map:object name="session-attr" ..../>
> <map:object name="my_chain ....>
> <first>request-param</first>
> <second>session-attr</second>
> ...
> </map:object>
> </map:objects>
> And I can simply use {request-param:myname} and {my_chain:skin}
>
> b) Chainers (?) are special components:
>
> <map:objects>
> <map:object name="request-param" ..../>
> <map:object name="session-attr" ..../>
> </map:objects>
> <map:object-chainers>
> <map:object-chainer name="my_chain ....>
> <first>request-param</first>
> <second>session-attr</second>
> ...
> </map:object>
> </map:object-chainers>
>
> And I can simply use {request-param:myname} and {my_chain:skin}
>
> Personally I would opt for a) because b) adds another component type
> to the sitemap that is not really needed and it might be confusing
> that {request-param:myname} is handled by an object component and
> {my_chain:skin} by an object-chainer.
+1 for a)
Btw, Forrest is now using InputModules extensively, both in the sitemap,
and in XML links, like <link href="site:index">, where 'site' identifies
an InputModule and 'index' is the key.
http://forrestbot.cocoondev.org/sites/xml-forrest/linking.html#implementation
Implementing this, I found the current InputModule architecture
(specifically, chaining) quite sufficient.
--Jeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
