I'm changing my vote to -0 for BlockList FTM since I've just realized there might a problem.
BlockList means that it's a list of block. But this is not what it is… It's a Block like any other block. The important part is not that it's a list of blocks, all our blocks are list of blocks. The important part is that it can be used to hold one or several blocks. -Vincent On Oct 1, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:54 AM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> >> In many APIs we sometime want to manipulate several Block but we don't >> want to put them in a meaningful Block like XDOM which is supposed to >> mean a full document. Right now the only way to do it is to have both >> an API with Block and another with Collection<Block> but it's a bit >> more annoying for return type where you are forced to return a >> List<Block> even if you are in a case where you actually have only one >> Block to return like in macros for example. >> >> We talked a long time ago with Vincent about a BlockCollection which >> would not have any meaning (i.e. no corresponding event in the stream >> rendering API) and would just be here to be able to pass several >> blocks as a Block. >> >> Since UI extension is going to use it a lot I propose to introduce it now. >> >> WDYT ? >> >> Any better idea for the name ? >> >> Here is my +1. > > I'm +1 with the idea. > > I'm ok with BlockList (hoping that people will not confuse BlockList with > ListBlock ;)). > > Another possibility is to use a name that reflects what it is, i.e. a > composite pattern (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_pattern) and > call it: CompositeBlock > > I'm also ok for that since we've used that naming in several other places. > > So to summarize: > > +0 BlockCollection > +1 ListBlock > +1 CompositeBlock > > Thanks > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
