Markus Angst schrieb:
> Hi Andreas,
>
>>> The resource type name validation in publication.rng is too rigid IMHO.
>>> If there is a reason for not allowing '-' and '_' in resource type
>>> names, it should be documented. If not, it would be nice to be able to
>>> use '-' and '_'.
>>
>> IMO special characters shouldn't be allowed, to reduce the risk of
>> failing pipelines etc.
>
> If I understand it right (which is never sure with a W3C standard :-))
> the XML standard would allow these characters in names and attribute
> values.
Yes, that wouldn't be a problem.
But, in my experience, people keep on using pipeline patterns like
<!-- {area}/{resourceType}-{rendertype}.html -->
<map:match pattern="*/*-*.html">
which might fail if the resource type name may contain dashes.
IMO we should keep the risk of such ambiguities to a minimum.
Experience tells that file names, IDs etc. work best without
special characters.
> On the other hand it is clear, that we are talking about a
> purely cosmetic problem here. I think it is not worth taking a risk to
> solve this.
>
>> But what we should do is add a human-readable name to resource types,
>> which is e.g. displayed in the menu ("New ... document").
>
> You mean to change what is done in the menu xsps ATM?
Yes, something like
<menu:item>
<i18n:translate>
<i18n:text>New ... Document</i18n:text>
<i18n:param><xsp:expr>resourceType.getLabel()</i18n:param>
</i18n:translate>
</menu:item>
That could even be outsourced to a logicsheet to keep the XSPs as
clean as possible until we can get rid of them :)
-- Andreas
--
Andreas Hartmann, CTO
BeCompany GmbH
http://www.becompany.ch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
