On Friday 02 April 2004 00:43, Raffael Herzog wrote:
Your solution above is of course perfectly usable for my current problem, but I'd still like to know whether something like this would be possible. With a growing component repository this might be needed at some point -- or am I getting something wrong about when to use blocks?
Hmmm... What you suggest could probably work, I think... although I don't think it is conceived to be used this way.
The block.xml is an "assembly" of components into a 'structure'. These structures should not be flexible, as it will destablize the reliability of the application. But this may be my personal opinion.
I am not afraid to create many block.xml, laying around which are set-up for a variant of assembly.
I must also admit, I'm not that used to "include" yet.
Stephen (need your help!), isn't it possible to add the manual assembly in the <include> element?
Nope.
The include is simply to create a container by inclusion of another block description.
Stephen.
--
|------------------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org/merlin | | http://dpml.net/merlin/distributions/latest | |------------------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
