Re: sitemap, jx and flow design

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> 
>> Now for the instructions (jx:forEach etc) we have the question if they 
>> should be choosed:
>>
>> 1. Programatically: There is an abstract base class with common 
>> template generator functionality. To implement e.g. JXTG this base 
>> class is extended. And the extended class enumerates the instructions 
>> that should be used and also choose parsing strategy etc.
>>
>> 2. Configuration: Instructions or set of instructions are made 
>> components and connected to the template generator in the configuration.
>>
>> 3. Within the template language: There are special instructions in 
>> some common base template language that allow the user to include sets 
>> of (Java written) instructions.
>>
>> I would prefer the configuration way find the programatic way ok and 
>> be against the within the template language way.
>> WDYT?
> 
> 
> This really looks like just an implementation detail... I would think 
> that the configuration way makes it easier (psycologically) for people 
> to add their own instructions than the other two. #1 is cleaner than #3 
> and less avalonish than #2.
> 
> I'm not thrilled with the idea of people adding their own keywords to 
> the template language... just like the sitemap, it should be possible 
> but not easy, so that people would feel discouradged to do it. So 
> probably #1 would be my choice.

Sitemap currently is configured with an XML file which describes all sitemap 
keywords (sitemap-language.xml), and we do not hear about folks messing with it. 
So I'd say #2 is good too, as long as configuration is a reference to a 
configuration file which is tucked into cocoon.jar - same as for the sitemap.

Vadim

Re: sitemap, jx and flow design

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> 
>> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Now for the instructions (jx:forEach etc) we have the question if 
>>> they should be choosed:
>>>
>>> 1. Programatically: There is an abstract base class with common 
>>> template generator functionality. To implement e.g. JXTG this base 
>>> class is extended. And the extended class enumerates the instructions 
>>> that should be used and also choose parsing strategy etc.
>>>
>>> 2. Configuration: Instructions or set of instructions are made 
>>> components and connected to the template generator in the configuration.
>>>
>>> 3. Within the template language: There are special instructions in 
>>> some common base template language that allow the user to include 
>>> sets of (Java written) instructions.
>>>
>>> I would prefer the configuration way find the programatic way ok and 
>>> be against the within the template language way.
>>> WDYT?
>>
>>
>>
>> This really looks like just an implementation detail... I would think 
>> that the configuration way makes it easier (psycologically) for people 
>> to add their own instructions than the other two. #1 is cleaner than 
>> #3 and less avalonish than #2.
>>
>> I'm not thrilled with the idea of people adding their own keywords to 
>> the template language... just like the sitemap, it should be possible 
>> but not easy, so that people would feel discouradged to do it. So 
>> probably #1 would be my choice.
> 
> 
> Sitemap currently is configured with an XML file which describes all 
> sitemap keywords (sitemap-language.xml), and we do not hear about folks 
> messing with it. So I'd say #2 is good too, as long as configuration is 
> a reference to a configuration file which is tucked into cocoon.jar - 
> same as for the sitemap.

Good point. I stand corrected.

-- 
Stefano.