You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com> on 2003/08/13 18:15:18 UTC
I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0
Hi mates,
I'm currently porting an i18nized application from 2.0 to 2.1 and hit an
incompatible change due to the namespace change between the two versions.
Browsing the docs, I can't see any change in the i18n markup. The
changes seem only to be in the component's configuration which now
accept several catalogues.
Did I miss some other important changes (I mean incompatible ones) ?
If not, why doesn't this transformer accept a "legacy" mode with the old
namespace and configuration ? This would allow for immediate back
compatibility.
If this makes sense, I'm volunteering for this.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>> BTW, on my way to support legacy, I also supported non-namespaced
>> attributes on "i18n:" elements. This means one can write <i18n:text
>> key="blah"> instead of <i18n:text i18n:key="blah"> which always
>> seemed cumbersome to me.
>
> Common sense tells me that <i18n:text key="blah"> should be the
> mainstream syntax, and not a legacy syntax...
Totally agree. My fix checks the non-namespaced attribute first, meaning
that using non-prefixed attributes is faster ;-)
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> BTW, on my way to support legacy, I also supported non-namespaced
> attributes on "i18n:" elements. This means one can write <i18n:text
> key="blah"> instead of <i18n:text i18n:key="blah"> which always seemed
> cumbersome to me.
Common sense tells me that <i18n:text key="blah"> should be the
mainstream syntax, and not a legacy syntax...
Vadim
> I'll commit this, so that it can go into 2.1.1...
>
> Sylvain
>
Re: Official i18n namespace (was Re: I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0)
Posted by Konstantin Piroumian <kp...@apache.org>.
My trigger on i18n was late this time as I am on vacation, but I'd like to
explain why the namespace was changed.
A quot from changes list:
<quot>
Extended implementation of i18n transformer to allow markup in translations,
inline translations (conditional processing) and named parameters. Now i18n
transformer is cachable, this will affect on dynamic markup, e.g.
i18n:date-time. WARN: The namespace of i18n markup is changed to
"http://apache.org/cocoon/i18n/2.1". i18n samples are updated to demonstrate
the new features. (KP) Thanks to Matthieu Sozeau.
</quote>
Also, there are minor changes in syntax for number formatting in translation
parameters (don't remember details).
What is the most important thing is that 2.1 version is cached, while 2.0 is
not.
In any case, I am +1 for adding support for both namespaces. Another
solution could be to add a stylesheet and an Ant target for migrating 2.0 to
2.1 markup.
I should add that I am agree with all you decide, guys, cause it seems that
you are more interested in i18n than I am ATM.
Regards,
Konstantin
From: "Sylvain Wallez" <sy...@anyware-tech.com>
> Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> > Bruno Dumon wrote:
> >
> >>> This makes me think...
> >>>
> >>> What about reverting the "official" i18n namespace to ".../i18n/2.0"
> >>> as it was before ? This would allow warning-less compatibility of
> >>> 2.0 applications and avoid breaking lots of docs, books, articles,
etc.
> >>>
> >>> Of course, we should provide "legacy" support for the "../i18n/2.1"
> >>> namespace as it has been released (damn, wish I did this a few days
> >>> before).
> >>>
> >>> What do you think ?
> >>
> >>
> >> How about making them synonyms, i.e. giving them an equals status?
> >
> >
> > +1
>
>
> Ok. This simply means removing the warning when encountering a "2.0"
> namespace.
>
> >> The new namespace is already in Cocoon 2.1 for a very long time, and
> >> I think many people started to depend on it.
> >
> >
> > Sylvain does not want to remove 2.1 support, but only make 2.0 the
> > official one. But even this is a bit strange to explain to users :-)
>
>
> Makes sense. So let's just say that the official namespace is 2.1 but
> that 2.0 compatibility is ensured. This should make everybody happy ;-)
>
> Sylvain
>
> --
> Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
> http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
> { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
> Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
>
>
>
Re: Official i18n namespace (was Re: I18nTransformer : differences
between 2.1 and 2.0)
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
>
>>> This makes me think...
>>>
>>> What about reverting the "official" i18n namespace to ".../i18n/2.0"
>>> as it was before ? This would allow warning-less compatibility of
>>> 2.0 applications and avoid breaking lots of docs, books, articles, etc.
>>>
>>> Of course, we should provide "legacy" support for the "../i18n/2.1"
>>> namespace as it has been released (damn, wish I did this a few days
>>> before).
>>>
>>> What do you think ?
>>
>>
>> How about making them synonyms, i.e. giving them an equals status?
>
>
> +1
Ok. This simply means removing the warning when encountering a "2.0"
namespace.
>> The new namespace is already in Cocoon 2.1 for a very long time, and
>> I think many people started to depend on it.
>
>
> Sylvain does not want to remove 2.1 support, but only make 2.0 the
> official one. But even this is a bit strange to explain to users :-)
Makes sense. So let's just say that the official namespace is 2.1 but
that 2.0 compatibility is ensured. This should make everybody happy ;-)
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Official i18n namespace (was Re: I18nTransformer : differences
between 2.1 and 2.0)
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
Bruno Dumon wrote:
>>This makes me think...
>>
>>What about reverting the "official" i18n namespace to ".../i18n/2.0" as
>>it was before ? This would allow warning-less compatibility of 2.0
>>applications and avoid breaking lots of docs, books, articles, etc.
>>
>>Of course, we should provide "legacy" support for the "../i18n/2.1"
>>namespace as it has been released (damn, wish I did this a few days before).
>>
>>What do you think ?
>
>
> How about making them synonyms, i.e. giving them an equals status?
+1
> The new namespace is already in Cocoon 2.1 for a very long time, and I
> think many people started to depend on it.
Sylvain does not want to remove 2.1 support, but only make 2.0 the
official one. But even this is a bit strange to explain to users :-)
Joerg
Re: Official i18n namespace (was Re: I18nTransformer : differences
between 2.1 and 2.0)
Posted by Bruno Dumon <br...@outerthought.org>.
On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 22:55, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> > Bruno Dumon wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 18:15, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi mates,
> >>>
> >>> I'm currently porting an i18nized application from 2.0 to 2.1 and
> >>> hit an incompatible change due to the namespace change between the
> >>> two versions.
> >>>
> >>> Browsing the docs, I can't see any change in the i18n markup. The
> >>> changes seem only to be in the component's configuration which now
> >>> accept several catalogues.
> >>>
> >>> Did I miss some other important changes (I mean incompatible ones) ?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> We had this discussion some time ago, and nobody seemed to remember
> >> why it changed, but it changed.
> >>
> >> There have been features added but I don't know if (and don't think
> >> that) compatibility of existing features was broken.
> >>
> >>
> >>> If not, why doesn't this transformer accept a "legacy" mode with the
> >>> old namespace and configuration ? This would allow for immediate
> >>> back compatibility.
> >>
> >>
> >> Seems ok to me. If we tried this before the 2.1 release I would even
> >> have been in favor of dropping the 2.1 namespace alltogether, but now
> >> it's a bit too late for that.
> >
> >
> > Yep, too late. Too bad :-(
> >
> >> BTW, the old sitemap configuration (before multi-catalogue support)
> >> is still supported.
> >>
> >
> > I just finished "legacy" support in the I18nTransformer, and the old
> > application seems to run just fine.
>
>
> This makes me think...
>
> What about reverting the "official" i18n namespace to ".../i18n/2.0" as
> it was before ? This would allow warning-less compatibility of 2.0
> applications and avoid breaking lots of docs, books, articles, etc.
>
> Of course, we should provide "legacy" support for the "../i18n/2.1"
> namespace as it has been released (damn, wish I did this a few days before).
>
> What do you think ?
How about making them synonyms, i.e. giving them an equals status?
The new namespace is already in Cocoon 2.1 for a very long time, and I
think many people started to depend on it.
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
bruno@outerthought.org bruno@apache.org
Official i18n namespace (was Re: I18nTransformer : differences between
2.1 and 2.0)
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 18:15, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi mates,
>>>
>>> I'm currently porting an i18nized application from 2.0 to 2.1 and
>>> hit an incompatible change due to the namespace change between the
>>> two versions.
>>>
>>> Browsing the docs, I can't see any change in the i18n markup. The
>>> changes seem only to be in the component's configuration which now
>>> accept several catalogues.
>>>
>>> Did I miss some other important changes (I mean incompatible ones) ?
>>>
>>
>>
>> We had this discussion some time ago, and nobody seemed to remember
>> why it changed, but it changed.
>>
>> There have been features added but I don't know if (and don't think
>> that) compatibility of existing features was broken.
>>
>>
>>> If not, why doesn't this transformer accept a "legacy" mode with the
>>> old namespace and configuration ? This would allow for immediate
>>> back compatibility.
>>
>>
>> Seems ok to me. If we tried this before the 2.1 release I would even
>> have been in favor of dropping the 2.1 namespace alltogether, but now
>> it's a bit too late for that.
>
>
> Yep, too late. Too bad :-(
>
>> BTW, the old sitemap configuration (before multi-catalogue support)
>> is still supported.
>>
>
> I just finished "legacy" support in the I18nTransformer, and the old
> application seems to run just fine.
This makes me think...
What about reverting the "official" i18n namespace to ".../i18n/2.0" as
it was before ? This would allow warning-less compatibility of 2.0
applications and avoid breaking lots of docs, books, articles, etc.
Of course, we should provide "legacy" support for the "../i18n/2.1"
namespace as it has been released (damn, wish I did this a few days before).
What do you think ?
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com>.
Bruno Dumon wrote:
>On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 18:15, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>
>>Hi mates,
>>
>>I'm currently porting an i18nized application from 2.0 to 2.1 and hit an
>>incompatible change due to the namespace change between the two versions.
>>
>>Browsing the docs, I can't see any change in the i18n markup. The
>>changes seem only to be in the component's configuration which now
>>accept several catalogues.
>>
>>Did I miss some other important changes (I mean incompatible ones) ?
>>
>>
>
>We had this discussion some time ago, and nobody seemed to remember why it changed, but it changed.
>
>There have been features added but I don't know if (and don't think that) compatibility of existing features was broken.
>
>
>>If not, why doesn't this transformer accept a "legacy" mode with the old namespace and configuration ? This would allow for immediate back compatibility.
>>
>>
>
>Seems ok to me. If we tried this before the 2.1 release I would even have been in favor of dropping the 2.1 namespace alltogether, but now it's a bit too late for that.
>
>
Yep, too late. Too bad :-(
>BTW, the old sitemap configuration (before multi-catalogue support) is still supported.
>
I just finished "legacy" support in the I18nTransformer, and the old
application seems to run just fine.
:-( again !
BTW, on my way to support legacy, I also supported non-namespaced
attributes on "i18n:" elements. This means one can write <i18n:text
key="blah"> instead of <i18n:text i18n:key="blah"> which always seemed
cumbersome to me.
I'll commit this, so that it can go into 2.1.1...
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: I18nTransformer : differences between 2.1 and 2.0
Posted by Bruno Dumon <br...@outerthought.org>.
On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 18:15, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Hi mates,
>
> I'm currently porting an i18nized application from 2.0 to 2.1 and hit an
> incompatible change due to the namespace change between the two versions.
>
> Browsing the docs, I can't see any change in the i18n markup. The
> changes seem only to be in the component's configuration which now
> accept several catalogues.
>
> Did I miss some other important changes (I mean incompatible ones) ?
We had this discussion some time ago, and nobody seemed to remember why
it changed, but it changed.
There have been features added but I don't know if (and don't think
that) compatibility of existing features was broken.
>
> If not, why doesn't this transformer accept a "legacy" mode with the old
> namespace and configuration ? This would allow for immediate back
> compatibility.
Seems ok to me. If we tried this before the 2.1 release I would even
have been in favor of dropping the 2.1 namespace alltogether, but now
it's a bit too late for that.
BTW, the old sitemap configuration (before multi-catalogue support) is
still supported.
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
bruno@outerthought.org bruno@apache.org