On Jun 11, 2005, at 7:53 PM, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
On Sab, 11 de Junio de 2005, 10:34, Carsten Ziegeler dijo:
Glen Ezkovich wrote:
The fix appears easy, but is something broken? Has someone expressed
the desire to use two languages in a single sitemap or is this just
an instance of feature creep?
I tend to agree, so I think we should for now just forbid to write
different map:flow sections in a single sitemap (by different I mean
that they use a different interpreter). If someone wants to use more
than one language we can add that easily.
This made me think about the future:
1-Exists or will exists the need to migrate JSflow to javaFlow (legal,
convenience, user desire or whatever)?
Easing migration would be more of concern if my answer to #2 were
yes. There are workarounds that I think would be more appropriate
such as separate sitemaps for migrating to JavaFlow.
2-Should we want to encourage people to write Javaflow instead of
JSFlow?
No. While I plan on using Javaflow going forward, JSFlow makes flow
available to Javascript programers (web masters).
3-Need to be a web glue for flow code too?
Don't know yet. What is the use case?
I just think its prudent to wait until there is a real need before we
add a feature that may introduce complexities.
Glen Ezkovich
HardBop Consulting
glen at hard-bop.com
A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to
worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
