RE: Writing for users (was: Re: [RT] Improving Sitemap and Flowscript)

["Hunsberger, Peter" <Pe...@stjude.org>]

Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org> asks:

> I'm fine with the concept, but this brings another question: 
> who is the 
> average sitemap writer/manager? I would say that in the Cocoon 
> management SoC paradigm who manages the sitemap is not 
> necessariyl an OO 
> programmer (or, for that matter, a programmer altogether). She is 
> (probably) knows about XML, HTML and HTTP, but it's far less than 
> granted that he knows what an "object model" is.
> 
> I think, then, that sitemap semantics should not assume previous OOP 
> knowledge, and I would refrain from using programmer-domain specific 
> terms to describe the sitemap behaviour. This is why I'm more 
> inclined 
> towards "environment": it's probably easier to explain to a 
> programmer 
> that sitemap's environment is actually the object model than having a 
> manager understand what the heck an object model is.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 

Now-a-days I think anyone that has done even a bit of Web programming
has been exposed to some form of Object Model.  Microsoft refers to them
in their DHTML documentation, then you've got all the various DOMs
hanging around.  You've pretty well gotta have some comfort with OO
terms if you're touching Cocoon...

Even managers need some basic understanding of OO if they are going to
manage their staff effectively.  Given that they shouldn't really care
one of their staff is adapting an environment or an object mode I'd vote
for object model.  Environment actually sounds harder to explain to the
managers I know.

Re: Writing for users (was: Re: [RT] Improving Sitemap and Flowscript)

[Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org>]

Hunsberger, Peter wrote:
> 
> Now-a-days I think anyone that has done even a bit of Web programming
> has been exposed to some form of Object Model.  Microsoft refers to them
> in their DHTML documentation, then you've got all the various DOMs
> hanging around.  

Microsoft isn't actually my official reference. :-) I have the 
perception that environment is more generic than object model, but 
probably both me and you are too biased. We should ask managers. :-)


> You've pretty well gotta have some comfort with OO
> terms if you're touching Cocoon...

I have to strongly disagree here. Please point me to an example of OO 
skills needed to manage a sitemap (*not* develop Cocoon components): if 
there are, we are doing something wrong and the just failed to build the 
pyramid envisioned a long time ago. You need to know XML, granted, but I 
see no real need of OO background.

> Even managers need some basic understanding of OO if they are going to
> manage their staff effectively.  Given that they shouldn't really care
> one of their staff is adapting an environment or an object mode I'd vote
> for object model.  Environment actually sounds harder to explain to the
> managers I know.

Remember that in this case manager != CTO. A sitemap manager is just 
someone managing the URI space and building pipelines. And to me it's 
quite the opposite: most (sitemap) managers I know would understand 
environment much better, since it's not context specific.

Ciao,

-- 
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. -  http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
     (Now blogging at: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/gianugo/)