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 2004/05/10 19:12:55 UTC
uri parametrizer for assets
i would like to do
http://127.0.0.1:8888/default/info-authoring/index/some_asset.gif
?lenya.usecase=info-meta&lenya.step=showscreen
to present the meta data screen for assets. it seems to me that using
the page envelope for assets makes quite some sense. however, there are
a couple of problems:
* an asset asset.gif does not map to asset/index.xml as the path mapper
expects. more precisely, it does not map in the same way as a html page
maps to a file.
* i get org.apache.lenya.ac.AccessControlException: Request
[org.apache.cocoon.environment.wrapper.RequestWrapper@2c517b] does not
contain roles: URI: [/unicom/info-authoring/index/admin_active.gif]
Parameter: [lenya.step] = [showscreen] Parameter: [lenya.usecase] =
[info-meta]
i am asking since i am working on making the asset metadata editable.
i'd imagine we would run into similar issues once we consider asset
workflow (which we currently do not have)
thoughts?
-gregor
--
Gregor J. Rothfuss
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://wyona.com http://cocoon.apache.org/lenya
gregor.rothfuss@wyona.com gregor@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Rolf Kulemann <ma...@rolf-kulemann.com>.
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 10:17, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Rolf Kulemann wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 09:49, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> >
> >>Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> >>IMO it makes sense to have a meta (XML) document describing
> >>an asset, which would remove the separation between "documents"
> >>and "assets".
> >
> >
> > IMHO those meta infos are only properties attached to an asset/Document
> > which is stored i.e. in Slide. No separate "files" are needed. Those
> > properties (for workflow meta descriptions etc) can than be easy
> > queried.
>
> So it should be quite easy to obtain an XML representation
> of these meta data? I imagine something like
>
> <resource
> xlink:href="cocoon://resources/myimage.xml"
> xlink:show="embed"/>
Very good. Of course there are some more details to be discussed.
--
Rolf Kulemann
A chubby man with a white beard and a red suit will approach you soon.
Avoid him. He's a Commie.
PGP/GPG public key:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6B4EA7EA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org>.
Rolf Kulemann wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 09:49, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>
>>Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>>IMO it makes sense to have a meta (XML) document describing
>>an asset, which would remove the separation between "documents"
>>and "assets".
>
>
> IMHO those meta infos are only properties attached to an asset/Document
> which is stored i.e. in Slide. No separate "files" are needed. Those
> properties (for workflow meta descriptions etc) can than be easy
> queried.
So it should be quite easy to obtain an XML representation
of these meta data? I imagine something like
<resource
xlink:href="cocoon://resources/myimage.xml"
xlink:show="embed"/>
> I did that when using WebDAV and DASL. Talk about that on the
> sprint.
OK, I'm looking forward to that :)
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Rolf Kulemann <ma...@rolf-kulemann.com>.
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 09:49, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> IMO it makes sense to have a meta (XML) document describing
> an asset, which would remove the separation between "documents"
> and "assets".
IMHO those meta infos are only properties attached to an asset/Document
which is stored i.e. in Slide. No separate "files" are needed. Those
properties (for workflow meta descriptions etc) can than be easy
queried. I did that when using WebDAV and DASL. Talk about that on the
sprint.
>
> My publication API draft makes a step in this direction
> (e.g., by abandoning the term "document" in favor of
> "resource"+"version").
>
> You find more thoughts about this on
> http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=LenyaArchitecture
>
I'm currently adding some thoughts to that wiki.
--
Rolf Kulemann
"What I've done, of course, is total garbage."
-- R. Willard, Pure Math 430a
PGP/GPG public key:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6B4EA7EA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Rolf Kulemann <ma...@rolf-kulemann.com>.
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 10:20, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> that meta file already exists and holds the dc metadata for an asset. it
> should also contain references to the places where the asset is used to
> enable warnings similar to link management (if you delete an asset that
> is still in use, for instance). currently, the file is called
>
Mmhh, if we would use forrest LinkTransformer the check is not needed or
at least easier to implement.
--
Rolf Kulemann
Life is like a simile.
PGP/GPG public key:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6B4EA7EA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <gr...@apache.org>.
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>> i would like to do
>>
>> http://127.0.0.1:8888/default/info-authoring/index/some_asset.gif
>> ?lenya.usecase=info-meta&lenya.step=showscreen
> At the moment, we use separate directories for "documents"
> and "assets" for a better overview. If we merge the two notions,
> maybe the repository URL space (ATM, file system paths) could
> also be merged?
maybe. i am not sure anymore why we made the distinction besides
historical cocoon reasons.
> IMO it makes sense to have a meta (XML) document describing
> an asset, which would remove the separation between "documents"
> and "assets".
that meta file already exists and holds the dc metadata for an asset. it
should also contain references to the places where the asset is used to
enable warnings similar to link management (if you delete an asset that
is still in use, for instance). currently, the file is called
asset.jpg.meta and stored inside resources, but could conceivably also
be stored inside content and have the structure
asset/
index.jpg <- the asset
index.meta <- the asset meta file
this would mirror the mapping of pages.
> My publication API draft makes a step in this direction
> (e.g., by abandoning the term "document" in favor of
> "resource"+"version").
ok cool. i'll figure out a workaround for now until we can address this
properly.
best,
-gregor
--
Gregor J. Rothfuss
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://wyona.com http://cocoon.apache.org/lenya
gregor.rothfuss@wyona.com gregor@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org>.
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> i would like to do
>
> http://127.0.0.1:8888/default/info-authoring/index/some_asset.gif
> ?lenya.usecase=info-meta&lenya.step=showscreen
>
> to present the meta data screen for assets. it seems to me that using
> the page envelope for assets makes quite some sense. however, there are
> a couple of problems:
>
> * an asset asset.gif does not map to asset/index.xml as the path mapper
> expects. more precisely, it does not map in the same way as a html page
> maps to a file.
At the moment, we use separate directories for "documents"
and "assets" for a better overview. If we merge the two notions,
maybe the repository URL space (ATM, file system paths) could
also be merged?
IMO it makes sense to have a meta (XML) document describing
an asset, which would remove the separation between "documents"
and "assets".
My publication API draft makes a step in this direction
(e.g., by abandoning the term "document" in favor of
"resource"+"version").
You find more thoughts about this on
http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=LenyaArchitecture
> * i get org.apache.lenya.ac.AccessControlException: Request
> [org.apache.cocoon.environment.wrapper.RequestWrapper@2c517b] does not
> contain roles: URI: [/unicom/info-authoring/index/admin_active.gif]
> Parameter: [lenya.step] = [showscreen] Parameter: [lenya.usecase] =
> [info-meta]
OK, this is probably a bug.
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Rolf Kulemann <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 20:27, Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
> > i am asking since i am working on making the asset metadata
> > editable. i'd imagine we would run into similar issues once we
> > consider asset workflow (which we currently do not have)
>
> I agree with your goal. I suggest we go further and eliminate the
> distinction entirely between an asset and a document. The full
> functionality available for documents (versioning, access control,
> meta data, ...) is required for assets.
Yes. And I hope all this will be very easy implemented once we use a
repository (with versioning capabilities i.e. Slide) to store content.
--
Regards,
Rolf Kulemann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org>.
Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
[...]
> For assets, I'm not sure a 1:1 mapping is sufficient since I would
> like to associate meta information. Many file formats (for example,
> both png and jpeg) can support meta information directly, but in
> general we may need to have a support file that contains the meta
> information for an asset.
+1
I think this meta information file should be a main entry
point to access an asset. It would support the following
scenarios:
1) include the asset information in an XML document using
XInclude
2) support multiple views of the asset using different
transformations (e.g., an inline image or a linked
image)
3) support multiple representations of the asset (e.g., a
thumbnail and the complete image)
> I'm not sure I agree with the notion of a container for a document.
> It overloads the sematics of directory for both a single document
> and a section in a site. Second, I'm not sure what it "contains".
> Now that we have the meta information inside the document itself,
> what else would be contained? I don't think assets really make
> sense to be containee, since they should stand on there own.
IMO containers are just collections of references.
I don't know if it makes sense to think in terms
of hierarchical containment ...
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Jean Pierre LeJacq <jp...@quoininc.com>.
On Tue, 11 May 2004, Roger Stupf wrote:
> > For assets, I'm not sure a 1:1 mapping is sufficient since I would
> > like to associate meta information. Many file formats (for example,
> > both png and jpeg) can support meta information directly, but in
> > general we may need to have a support file that contains the meta
> > information for an asset.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with the notion of a container for a document.
> > It overloads the sematics of directory for both a single document
> > and a section in a site. Second, I'm not sure what it "contains".
> > Now that we have the meta information inside the document itself,
> > what else would be contained? I don't think assets really make
> > sense to be containee, since they should stand on there own.
>
> What if one wants to use the same asset on different documents? At the
> moment, the assset area is connected to a specific document. I think it
> would be useful to have a publication-wide asset area.
Agreed. Assets need to be considered first class and not a
"containee" of a document. Its perfectly acceptable to organize
assets into a hierarchical structure but not to assume that asset
are subsidiary to a document.
--
JP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Roger Stupf <ro...@unicom.unizh.ch>.
> Hmmm, one of my major goals is to eliminate this distinction. I
> would like documents to have the ability to be "checked out" from
> Lenya and edited offline. This then makes documents equivalent to
> assets. I think this is very important since in-browser editors are
> relatively weak compared to full-fledge xml editors.
+1
At the university of Zurich we realised that we would love to have the
ability to check out documents and edit them on ean easy-to-use and
always-working "off-browser" xml-editor. This will for instance reduce
the frustrations of those authors who will always compare the user
experience (such as the responsiveness) of a web application with e.g.
a word application. Of course, this is against the philosophy of Lenya
that you can edit the page on your browser...
>> i thought about the path mapper and was wondering if it would make
>> sense to have one mapping for the "container" or page and one for
>> things that go into it. while the "container" may map to a
>> directory with an index file or to just an index.xml (or something
>> else) the assets have a 1:1 mapping currently.
>
> I've been thinking this through a bit as well. First, I agree with
> an earlier post that we should define this as an API so we don't
> limit ourselves to a file system.
>
> For assets, I'm not sure a 1:1 mapping is sufficient since I would
> like to associate meta information. Many file formats (for example,
> both png and jpeg) can support meta information directly, but in
> general we may need to have a support file that contains the meta
> information for an asset.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with the notion of a container for a document.
> It overloads the sematics of directory for both a single document
> and a section in a site. Second, I'm not sure what it "contains".
> Now that we have the meta information inside the document itself,
> what else would be contained? I don't think assets really make
> sense to be containee, since they should stand on there own.
What if one wants to use the same asset on different documents? At the
moment, the assset area is connected to a specific document. I think it
would be useful to have a publication-wide asset area.
Aloha,
Roger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
>On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>
>
>Hmmm, one of my major goals is to eliminate this distinction. I
>would like documents to have the ability to be "checked out" from
>Lenya and edited offline. This then makes documents equivalent to
>assets. I think this is very important since in-browser editors are
>relatively weak compared to full-fledge xml editors.
>
>
it seems to me that the size of document plays a role here.
I see two ways to edit offline:
1) WebDAV
2) Download/Upload
I think one problem of WebDAV is notification if something goes wrong,
or does anybody have a nice solution (one way is to have a client which
stays
in touch with the server)
>
> I don't think assets really make
>sense to be containee, since they should stand on there own.
>
>
agreed, but it should be possible to reference them easily.
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://cocoon.apache.org/lenya/
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Jean Pierre LeJacq <jp...@quoininc.com>.
On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> >
>
> > The only distinction that does make sense is that documents have
> > relationships amongst one another while assets can only be referred
> > to (eg, they cannot refer to other assets/documents). Even this
> > isn't entirely true with assets such as PDF or Word files.
>
> another one (which currently holds true): assets are not editable from
> lenya but are treated as black boxes.
Hmmm, one of my major goals is to eliminate this distinction. I
would like documents to have the ability to be "checked out" from
Lenya and edited offline. This then makes documents equivalent to
assets. I think this is very important since in-browser editors are
relatively weak compared to full-fledge xml editors.
> i thought about the path mapper and was wondering if it would make
> sense to have one mapping for the "container" or page and one for
> things that go into it. while the "container" may map to a
> directory with an index file or to just an index.xml (or something
> else) the assets have a 1:1 mapping currently.
I've been thinking this through a bit as well. First, I agree with
an earlier post that we should define this as an API so we don't
limit ourselves to a file system.
For assets, I'm not sure a 1:1 mapping is sufficient since I would
like to associate meta information. Many file formats (for example,
both png and jpeg) can support meta information directly, but in
general we may need to have a support file that contains the meta
information for an asset.
I'm not sure I agree with the notion of a container for a document.
It overloads the sematics of directory for both a single document
and a section in a site. Second, I'm not sure what it "contains".
Now that we have the meta information inside the document itself,
what else would be contained? I don't think assets really make
sense to be containee, since they should stand on there own.
--
JP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <gr...@apache.org>.
Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
>
>>i am asking since i am working on making the asset metadata
>>editable. i'd imagine we would run into similar issues once we
>>consider asset workflow (which we currently do not have)
>
>
> I agree with your goal. I suggest we go further and eliminate the
> distinction entirely between an asset and a document. The full
> functionality available for documents (versioning, access control,
> meta data, ...) is required for assets.
+1
> The only distinction that does make sense is that documents have
> relationships amongst one another while assets can only be referred
> to (eg, they cannot refer to other assets/documents). Even this
> isn't entirely true with assets such as PDF or Word files.
another one (which currently holds true): assets are not editable from
lenya but are treated as black boxes.
i thought about the path mapper and was wondering if it would make sense
to have one mapping for the "container" or page and one for things that
go into it. while the "container" may map to a directory with an index
file or to just an index.xml (or something else) the assets have a 1:1
mapping currently.
--
Gregor J. Rothfuss
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://wyona.com http://cocoon.apache.org/lenya
gregor.rothfuss@wyona.com gregor@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org
Re: uri parametrizer for assets
Posted by Jean Pierre LeJacq <jp...@quoininc.com>.
On Mon, 10 May 2004, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> i am asking since i am working on making the asset metadata
> editable. i'd imagine we would run into similar issues once we
> consider asset workflow (which we currently do not have)
I agree with your goal. I suggest we go further and eliminate the
distinction entirely between an asset and a document. The full
functionality available for documents (versioning, access control,
meta data, ...) is required for assets.
The only distinction that does make sense is that documents have
relationships amongst one another while assets can only be referred
to (eg, they cannot refer to other assets/documents). Even this
isn't entirely true with assets such as PDF or Word files.
--
JP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org