On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the new rendering code I need to call some code that transforms
> [[[wiki:][Space.]][Doc]] into a link. I'm proposing to introduce 2 new
> classes/components in Core:
>
> * DocumentName: Represents a Document's Name. It'll have 3 properties:
> - String wiki
> - String space
> - String page
+1
>
> * DocumentNameFactory: Create a DocumentName from a string
> representing a Document's name. Transforms [[[wiki:][Space.]][Doc]]
> into a DocumentName object.
+1
>
> * The DocumentNameFactory would depend on the Execution component so
> that it can use the current wiki, current space and current document
> if these are not specified.
>
> * This raises the question as to whether we should continue passing a
> String representing a document name in our APIs in the future or
> instead pass a DocumentName. I'm not yet sure what is the best answer
> to this...
+1 for using DocumentName in our API instead of strings internally but
from velocity I'm not sure...
>
> * Other question: In the Document object do we store the DocumentName
> object or do we store instead only Space and Wiki objects? If it's the
> latter then we need to fetch them from the DB which takes time. We
> could also decide to only fetch them when requested with getSpace()
> and getWiki() (i.e. lazy loading).
>
> * BTW this also raises the question as to whether we want to have a
> representation for space and wiki or not and instead only use tags, in
> which case a document name is simply a String like "mypage". But then
> it should be unique. So it could also be made of a list of identity
> tags as in: "space=sp1,sp2:wiki:wiki1:language=fr:mypage". Or we could
> standardize it as "wiki1:sp1,sp2:fr:mypage" and have the
> DocumentNameFactory transform it into tags. In that case the
> DocumentName object would be a Map of tags + the document name
> ("mypage"). I think we need to decide ASAP if we want to keep the
> strict and hardcoded notion of Wiki>Space>Document>Object>Property or
> instead go full tags since this changes completely the v2 interfaces
> and code we're writing.
I'm -1 for "only tags" as at least applications would benefit from a
strong folder/spaces organization IMO.
There is also the question of real tree-like structure of the spaces
as it is described in http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-354
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
