cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Pipeline conditional model
Date Thu, 08 Jun 2000 23:28:25 GMT
Jonathan Stimmel wrote:
> 
> Shoot, I forgot to catch up on this thread before posting to the
> sitemap thread... Oh well, a little redundancy never hurt anyone =)
> 
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 07:25:18PM +0200, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> 
> > Interesting enough, I played Sam's role in the creation of the JAMES
> > sitemap, advocating that flat pipelines are better than tree-like ones
> > (and implemented the same thing myself in Ant, even if that is kinda
> > different).
> >
> > But I changed my mind.
> 
> As I stated in my other post, I believe the sitemap should be viewed
> as a tree. I honestly hadn't given much thought to the conditional
> model, however, and I appreciate the amount of thought you (and others)
> have put into it.
> 
> > > 2) I readily concede that the <if/> approach scales UP better
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
> > > 3) I would argue that the "when=" approach scales DOWN better
> >
> > I'm still not sure of the impact on this over my girlfriend... I'd
> > better test it soon.
> 
> Personally, I think "scaling down" is more important. A well planned
> site should be relatively simple and won't require a complex conditional
> model. 

agreed.

> Additionally, reusing the XSL conditional model makes for a
> shallower learning curve, particularly for small sites where the
> designer *is* the administrator.

Good point.
 
> I would expect that 95% (ok, maybe I'm being optimistic =) of sitemaps
> will be layers of choices - a decision tree. As has been observed,
> this would allow you to create AND relationships (by nesting decisions),
> but unfortunately doesn't provide an OR relationship for the remaining
> 5%. Assuming the xsl-like model can pass the Girlfriend Test, should
> we necessarily abandon it because of that remaining 5%? Combine that
> model with named pipeline fragments (<resource>), and you can almost
> acheive an OR relationship (it still exists as a branch, but you are
> no longer required to copy and paste the actual process).
> 
> A question in my mind is, "how many layers of decisions would
> a site need?". I personally can't imagine a site that would need
> a tree more than 3 or four layers deep. Heck, would you really
> want your server making a dozen tests per request? I'm pushing to
> develop a cocoon infrastructure for a fairly complex network of
> sites (www.realcities.com and 60+ related sites), and I can't
> imagine using a sitemap more than a couple layers deep...

I share your vision.
 
> > Like I said I'm superimposed...
> >
> >  (+/-)1
> >
> > Oh gee... now its your turn to quantistically measure me to make my wave
> > function collapse on a definitive state :)
> 
> Does this mean that if we all stare at you long enough, you'll come
> to a decision? ;)

Well, probably :) It normally happens that way... i just have to let
"percolate" thoughts in my neurons long enough to stabilize the learning
loop. Welcome to Stefano's quantum neural network :)

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<stefano@apache.org>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
 Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------



Mime
View raw message