Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
Marc Portier <mpo <at> outerthought.org> writes:
Ok, we (where we stands for Vadim, Tim, Bertrand, and Rolf) had a little chat on IRC and agreed on the following:
Block Title: Cocoon Forms, or Cocoon Forms 1.0
Block Name: cforms
Package: org.apache.cocoon.cforms
Namespace: http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0
sorry for missing the argumentation on keeping the 'forms' here, or is this a typo?
AFAIU it this is by intention, no typo. It means the implementation of a new
Yes, no typo. Cocoon Forms 1.0 is the one and only form framework for Cocoon at the moment. Thus namespace is ...cocoon/forms/.../1.0 Once we have new-kid-on-the-block replacement for the Cocoon Forms 1.0, it will be named Cocoon Forms 2.0 and have namespace .../cocoon/forms/.../2.0
thx for clarifying
(btw: any takers for my other remark on the order of version-number and cforms-subdomain?)
form framework can happen in a parallel block, but the namespace always points
to *the* form framework. For a new framework accepted as replacement for Woody
later on the namespace will just change to 2.0.
+1 from me for the proposal (no IRC possible from here)
Joerg
Vadim
-marc= -- Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
