[Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>]

Simple question:

  Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

  <map:match pattern="xxx">
    <map:act type="myAction">
        <map:call function="myFunction"/>
    </map:act>
  </map:match>

Are there any reasons that make this useful? Maybe with the
authentication framework? I think it is also possible to work around it
with redirects if we don't allow this.

What do you think?

Reinhard

Re: [Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>]

Ugo Cei wrote:

> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
>> Hm. Ain't it obvious? :)
>> Ok, if not: First sample: pipeline conditionally (depending on result 
>> of action) consists from single map:call. Second: pipeline 
>> unconditionally (always) consist from single map:call. That's the 
>> same as good'ol:
>
>
> Hmmm, maybe my question was a bit too terse ;-). I actually meant: how 
> can you *use* those pipelines if you don't have a matcher? 


No matcher --> any URL will do then. If this is subsitemap --> any URL 
in subsitemap space will work. You can analyze then this URL inside your 
flowscript.

Example I gave with the reader will effectively return the same html 
page for *any* request.

Vadim

Re: [Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Ugo Cei <u....@cbim.it>]

Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Hm. Ain't it obvious? :)
> Ok, if not: First sample: pipeline conditionally (depending on result of 
> action) consists from single map:call. Second: pipeline unconditionally 
> (always) consist from single map:call. That's the same as good'ol:

Hmmm, maybe my question was a bit too terse ;-). I actually meant: how 
can you *use* those pipelines if you don't have a matcher?

Sorry if this is a FAQ or a dumb question.

	Ugo

-- 
Ugo Cei - http://www.beblogging.com/blog/

Re: [Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>]

Ugo Cei wrote:

> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
>> PS Don't forget that match is no special tag; it can be omitted (as 
>> everything else):
>>
>>  <map:pipeline>
>>    <map:act type="myAction">
>>      <map:call function="myFunction"/>
>>    </map:act>
>>  </map:pipeline>
>>
>> Or:
>>
>>  <map:pipeline>
>>    <map:call function="myFunction"/>
>>  </map:pipeline>
>
>
> And what's the meaning of these? 


Hm. Ain't it obvious? :)
Ok, if not: First sample: pipeline conditionally (depending on result of 
action) consists from single map:call. Second: pipeline unconditionally 
(always) consist from single map:call. That's the same as good'ol:

 <map:pipeline>
   <map:read mime-type="text/html" src="closed-for-business.html"/>
 </map:pipeline>


PS See lint/sitemap.xmap in 2.0 for sitemap syntax tester.

Vadim

Re: [Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Ugo Cei <u....@cbim.it>]

Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> PS Don't forget that match is no special tag; it can be omitted (as 
> everything else):
> 
>  <map:pipeline>
>    <map:act type="myAction">
>      <map:call function="myFunction"/>
>    </map:act>
>  </map:pipeline>
> 
> Or:
> 
>  <map:pipeline>
>    <map:call function="myFunction"/>
>  </map:pipeline>

And what's the meaning of these?

	Ugo

-- 
Ugo Cei - http://www.beblogging.com/blog/

Re: [Flow] Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>]

Reinhard Pötz wrote:

>Simple question:
>
>  Do we allow actions to wrap call functions in the sitemap?
>

Yes. Moreover, map:call is subject to general sitemap syntax rules. 
E.g., it can be nested within act, select, match tags and can not appear 
after serialize, read, redirect.


>  <map:match pattern="xxx">
>    <map:act type="myAction">
>        <map:call function="myFunction"/>
>    </map:act>
>  </map:match>
>
>Are there any reasons that make this useful?
>

Is there a reason to disable this?

PS Don't forget that match is no special tag; it can be omitted (as 
everything else):

  <map:pipeline>
    <map:act type="myAction">
      <map:call function="myFunction"/>
    </map:act>
  </map:pipeline>

Or:

  <map:pipeline>
    <map:call function="myFunction"/>
  </map:pipeline>


Vadim


> Maybe with the
>authentication framework? I think it is also possible to work around it
>with redirects if we don't allow this.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Reinhard
>