You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lenya.apache.org by "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <gr...@apache.org> on 2005/08/03 14:33:50 UTC
[VOTE] require a wf schema for all doctypes
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>
>>> using a doctype doesn't mean one needs a workflow
>>
>>
>> how come?
>
>
> for instance a search engine screen or a dynamic listing ....
they should rather use a wf schema that only has one transition.
otherwise, you end up with hacks all over the codebase to handle the 'no
wf' case, and that is just wrong.
i propose we require a wf schema for all doctypes
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] require a wf schema for all doctypes
Posted by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org>.
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> i propose we require a wf schema for all doctypes
>
> +1
-1
Reason:
Requiring a wf schema for all doctypes would imply the need for
a trivial wf schema which accepts all events (this would mean an
infinite number of transitions which is out of the scope of a DFA).
The Lenya workflow schema doesn't support this functionality.
Each event which can be accepted has to be declared.
Workarounds:
1. Extend the workflow schema to indefinite automata:
<transition from="foo" to="bar">
<event name="*"/>
...
</transition>
I'd rather not suggest that since I'm not familiar with the
semantic implications. Maybe someone else is?
2. A "special" workflow schema.
-1
I don't really like the optional wf assignment, but I don't see a
solution in this case.
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] require a wf schema for all doctypes
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Doug Chestnut wrote:
>>
>> -1 This requirement is just imposing something which is in many cases
>> not necessary at all, e.g.
>>
>> Search Engine Screen
>> Dynamic Listing
>> Aggregation of various content
>> ....
>
>
> I am afraid that my knowledge of doctypes/publets in 1.4 is too
> limited for me to vote, but wouldn't the above examples be considered
> usecases and not doctypes? (possibly usecases of the doctype
> publet?). Sorry for another stupid question :).
no problem ;-) I might have to explain why the change was done in the
first place:
When you apply the menu transformer, which is a meta-stylesheet then the
workflow is being triggered within (global-sitemap.xmap, see lenya-page)
and this leads
to an error if there is no workflow. So the problem isn't really about
doctypes
or usecases or whatsoever.
But beside the original reason for the fix I strongly believe that doctypes
do not necessarily need a workflow. For instance an aggregation doctype
makes
sense in many cases resp. a portlet doctype, whereas the aggregated
content might
have a workflow, but the envelope doesn't need on.
Michi
>
> --Doug
>
>>
>> Let's not put a requirement which makes development very rigid.
>>
>> Michi
>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] require a wf schema for all doctypes
Posted by Doug Chestnut <dh...@virginia.edu>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>
>>> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> using a doctype doesn't mean one needs a workflow
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> how come?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> for instance a search engine screen or a dynamic listing ....
>>
>>
>>
>> they should rather use a wf schema that only has one transition.
>
>
>
> why a transition at all?
>
>> otherwise, you end up with hacks all over the codebase to handle the
>> 'no wf' case,
>
>
>
> what hacks?
>
>> and that is just wrong.
>>
>> i propose we require a wf schema for all doctypes
>
>
>
> what if you don't use a doctype and want to apply the Lenya menu
> transformer?
>
>>
>> +1
>
>
>
> -1 This requirement is just imposing something which is in many cases
> not necessary at all, e.g.
>
> Search Engine Screen
> Dynamic Listing
> Aggregation of various content
> ....
I am afraid that my knowledge of doctypes/publets in 1.4 is too limited
for me to vote, but wouldn't the above examples be considered usecases
and not doctypes? (possibly usecases of the doctype publet?). Sorry for
another stupid question :).
--Doug
>
> Let's not put a requirement which makes development very rigid.
>
> Michi
>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] require a wf schema for all doctypes
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> Michael Wechner wrote:
>
>> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>>
>>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>>
>>>> using a doctype doesn't mean one needs a workflow
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> how come?
>>
>>
>>
>> for instance a search engine screen or a dynamic listing ....
>
>
> they should rather use a wf schema that only has one transition.
why a transition at all?
> otherwise, you end up with hacks all over the codebase to handle the
> 'no wf' case,
what hacks?
> and that is just wrong.
>
> i propose we require a wf schema for all doctypes
what if you don't use a doctype and want to apply the Lenya menu
transformer?
>
> +1
-1 This requirement is just imposing something which is in many cases
not necessary at all, e.g.
Search Engine Screen
Dynamic Listing
Aggregation of various content
....
Let's not put a requirement which makes development very rigid.
Michi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org