> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >If we change this we have to change this too, don't we?
> >
> > <map:flow language="JavaScript">
> > <map:script src="flow.js"/>
> > </map:flow>
> >
> >-->
> >
> > <map:flow engine="xyz">
> > <map:controller src="yyz"/>
> > </map:flow>
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >
>
> Although we can change the attribute of <map:flow> ("type" would be more
> in accordance with other sitemap statements), it's content is actually a
> Configuration object given to the chosen flow engine. For
> type="JavaScript", it fully makes sense to list script files, but other
> implementations could have a totally different configuration, including
> class names.
>
> Note : that's why, at the start of flow discussion (a looooog time ago),
> I wanted to put <map:flow> inside <map:components>, because this is
> actually what it is : a component definition and configuration.
So you propose
<map:flow type="JavaScript">
<map:??? src="flow.js"/>
</map:flow>
What element should replace ??? in your opinion? <map:controller ... ?
Reinhard
--
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
Jetzt ein- oder umsteigen und USB-Speicheruhr als Prämie sichern!
