Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
From: "Gerard van Enk" <gerard.van.enk@eo.nl>
To: <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [RT] Layout-driven vs. content-driven
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 17:00:37 +0100
Message-ID: <NCBBKKMPILBOFACAPHDDIENODPAA.gerard.van.enk@eo.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <38BCFE97.5978198A@apache.org>
Importance: Normal

> > > The thought is taking shape. It depends on where the final "merging"
> > > should occour. If the final merging occours on the server
> side, you use
> > > XINCLUDE, if on the client side, XLINK...
> >
> > I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying.
> >
> > Is the following possible with Xlink/Xpointer? I'm not finished reading
> > everything from the Xlink/Xpointer documentation.......
> >
> > 1. There's a layout-template in which the layout is defined.
> > 2. This template is merged with the content using Xinclude.
> > 3. A stylesheet is applied to the merged file. This produces a frameset
> > which is sent to the browser. This frameset contains URIs which can be
> > translated by Cocoon into Xpointers. These Xpointers are
> pointers to parts
> > of the merged file (step 2).
>
> Why so? In case of HTML frames, the layout is simply translated into a
> frameset and the URIs are translated. It will be the browser to call the
> URIs. No need to mess around with XInclude or XPointers if you don't
> need to "merge" it.

But how do I define if it's becoming a merged file or a frameset? I thought
this is done by a serializer? I'd like to use the same file for the html or
the pdf.

>
> > 4. At stylesheet is applied to the parts of the merged file
> pointed to by
> > the Xpointers. These are sent back to the browser.
> >
> > Is this possible or am I talking nonsens?
>
> Sure it is, but what's the point? You get the same functionality anyway.
> I'm probably missing something.
>
> The XInclude part is done in case you want the layout to be rendered as
> tables. Then you _need_ to include all the pieces into one, but the
> browser is unaware of what's going on to generate the page. As it should
> always be.

But isn't the choice between frames or tables something that must be done in
the last stage of the processing?
I'm happy with the solution of doing it somewhere in the middle of the
processing chain.......but I thought this was something for the
serializing.....It's clear I don't understand it as good as I thought I did
8-(

Gerard