On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 20:54 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > Tim Williams wrote: > > On 6/23/05, Diwaker Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Now that the release is just around the corner (since the website is > >>already updated, I guess we're just waiting for the announcement, > >>perhaps we should jot down a priority list of new features for 0.8. > >> > >>Personally, I'd like to see the following happening: > >>...
> > I'd add... > > o Metadata -- I'd personally like to see support for inline dublin > > core "meta" tags, custom metadata, and external [RDF-based] metacards. > > This is a definite need, I'm not sure it will make into 0.8 though. If > someone is available to implement it for 0.8 then it goes in. I can > imagine myself looking into this for 0.9 if it hasn't already been done. ... > > > o Perspectives/Logic:Views as described > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=111942914210799&w=2\ > > I think we need more discussion on a design for this. I'd be more > comfortable if this kind of information was in the document metadata > rather than in the view. +1 to the concept though, just not sure how and > when. It should certainly be in the issue tracker. lol I reckon the whole design of views needs discussion (I will never stop on saying this). ;-) Seriously, coming back to metadata: I recommend to split the forrest:properties from the view. Ross was never really comfortable with their existence in the view and I agreed saying they are right now a later entry point into the processing pipeline (that I have in mind). I agree on an earlier mail from nicola (about metadata) and suggest: index.fv index.prop index.meta index.xml or: index.fv.xml index.prop.xml index.meta.xml index.xml Actually I am unsure which one is better because one invents fancy (e.g. *.meta) extensions, the other is reserving this extensions in the naming (*.meta.xml). The *.prop would contain the view specific extra content dispatcher (nuggets) that are now stored in the view. What is now missing is the logic:views part, because IMO that part has to stay in the view. The logic:view part is for the designer like the whole view. logic:view is handling *only* presentation logic to the view. Now one can argue that an earlier stage of forrest should do that but I do not see this. I see that designer need to create designs that are dependent on simple conditions to add (or not) contracts (and/or hooks) to the view. Views are following the dispatcher-view pattern which means that the view dispatches all nuggets (business helper) and contracts (view helper). logic:view is a filter which determines what to dispatch. How to activate this logic in the view I agree that need discussion. ;-) salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
