Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
<map:transformers default="xslt">
<map:transformer name="virtual2" src="org.apache.cocoon.transformation.VirtualPipelineTransformer">
<map:source param="src2"/>
<map:transform src="vpc-include.xsl">
<map:parameter name="file" value="{src}"/>
</map:transform>
<map:transform src="vpc-include.xsl">
<map:parameter name="file" value="{src2}"/>
</map:transform>
</map:transformer>
</map:transformers>
</map:components>
It seems weird to me to see sitemap statements in the <map:components> section. But they're also used as any other component. Hmm...
What about either:
- leave them in <map:components> but with special element names, e.g. <map:virtual-generator> that maps to the VirtualPipelineGenerator class
It can be <map:components> <map:generators> <map:virtual name="a">
That's enough information to build it.
- or separate them in a <map:virtual-components> section just as we have today <map:resources> and <map:views>?
What would happen with default component? If we go this route,
... </map:components>
<map:virtual> <map:transformers default="???"> <map:transformer name="a"> ... </map:transformer> </map:transformers> </map:virtual>
What will be in place of "???", and how this would relate to the default transformer in the map:components section?
Good point. So let's go for <map:virtual-blah> in <map:components>.
No, what does that buy you? <generator> means it generates, who cares how it's implemented?
Keep in mind that VPC will be used normally from another block, so the using block really doesn't care if it's virtual or real, and the defining block is not really going to be cleaner having a mix of <generator> and <virtual-generator>
If you rationale is for sitemap editors, it's easy to differentiate already: a virtual generator won't have the class attribute.
-- Stefano.
