Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 79956 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 19:01:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 19:01:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 8144 invoked by uid 97); 8 Dec 2002 19:02:18 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 8128 invoked by uid 97); 8 Dec 2002 19:02:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 8116 invoked by uid 98); 8 Dec 2002 19:02:17 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Message-ID: <3DF3973E.10104@apache.org> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:02:22 +0100 From: Stephen McConnell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Avalon Developers List Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Context Defined References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021208001442.00bb0820@mail.sutic.nu> <3DF35611.8010202@yahoo.com> <3DF35FD6.9020907@apache.org> <3DF38CE9.6030109@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Stephen McConnell wrote: > >> >> >> Paul Hammant wrote: >> >>> Leo, >>> >>>> >>>> the Context interface and its associated stage - Contextualizable - >>>> has been the subject of much controversy. As a matter of fact, I'd >>>> say that it is the single most controversial subject we have in >>>> Framework, and I'd like to propose a way where I think the >>>> conflicting viewpoints can be accomodated, although this will >>>> require some compromise. >>>> >>>> -oOo- >>>> >>>> [...] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm mostly comfortable with the definition you've given. I commend >>> you for attempting a non-partisan solution to this issue. I'd like >>> to propose that for this effort *you* are seen to lead the dialogue >>> and dissentors to definitions suggest patches to you, rather that >>> write some 10 page redifinition. >> >> >> >> >> Umm, I wonder what Paul is talking about ... >> >> dis-sent-er: >> >> One who refuses to accept the doctrines or usages >> of an established or a national church, especially >> a Protestant who dissents from the Church of England. >> >> Seems to me that you can only be a dissenter if you have an >> established belief from which one dissent - and if anything the >> threads related to context clearly indicate that there is hardly a >> case for an established belief pertaining to context. >> >> ;-) > > > Paul, Stephen, can we start behaving as adults and dissipate personal > friction between ourselves instead of throwing it back into the > community? This is for *both* of you. > > Thank you very much. > Stafano: What are you talking about? I would not Paul's message childish - overly cautious perhaps - but my take is that that's only because Paul's been burned on this subject once before. My reply ... subtle? Yes. Childish ? No. It takes into the account the past, my perception of Paul concers on where we move on this subject, and interests in seeing good old fashioned colaboration as we move forward on this. Please, let's drop these derogatory comments - they're not justified or helpful. What your better of doing is putting together and posting the Cocoon use case for context - what are you doing today - what's wrong with it - what right with it - how do the things we are discussing play into this - i.e. constructive, useful stuff. Cheers, Steve. -- Stephen J. McConnell OSM SARL digital products for a global economy mailto:mcconnell@osm.net http://www.osm.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: