From nicolaken@supereva.it Sun Jul 2 16:15:36 2000 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 45262 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2000 16:15:36 -0000 Received: from adamo4.supereva.it (HELO mail.supereva.it) (195.110.96.107) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2000 16:15:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 12830 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2000 16:15:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ARES) (151.35.2.194) by mail.supereva.it with SMTP; 2 Jul 2000 16:15:12 -0000 Message-ID: <00b101bfe440$c9d088b0$c2022397@ARES> Reply-To: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" To: References: <395CD669.DEC70286@apache.org> <00ef01bfe343$360a6c70$30022397@ARES> <395F412B.ABE5B76D@apache.org> Subject: Re: [C2] (hopefully) last sitemap major changes Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 17:49:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" To: Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2000 3:18 PM Subject: Re: [C2] (hopefully) last sitemap major changes > > > 2) filter becomes transformer > > > > > > One main reason for this: filter and its verbe are the same word in > > > English... this causes big troubles in sitemap validation, while > > > "transform" and "transformer" are different words and have different > > > semantics inside the sitemap. > > > > transformer reminds me of small robot toys... > > So? my brother had a bunch of them :) I thought they were pretty cool. Pretty cool?!? They were GREAT! :-) > > > 5) added the notion of "error handling" (which includes metaevents > > > handling) as such > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am using Cocoon for two projects and one is an intranet. > > Here security and error handling are not an option. > > When I first saw the sitemap proposal I thought it was a good idea (I still > > think it is), but error handling was not in it. > > Now it is... but why don't we define a standard DTD for notifications and > > standard XLST for main browsers? > > Oh, sure, this is the idea, in fact. But nothing the sitemap should be > aware of. > > Something like (mixed notation) > > > > > > foo_title > > foo_description > > foo_message > > foo.stacktrace > > > > This is exactly the plan, but the sitemap is completely independent on > this.... and while error handling doesn't give you control on how this > schema is created (the pipeline metaevents will be serialized with > something like this), it does allow you to control how to process this > further. Ok, just saying that the DTD is useful for me; I use Cocoon to serve XML to a Visual Basic client and he is not very happy to receive HTML or HTTP errors... > Many people expressed the need for having some users diplayed errors in > some ways and some users (mainly developers or internal people) having > access on more detailed transcritps of what's going on. > > The error handling pipeline will give you the ability to implement > whatever you want with the pipeline meta-information just like it was > another generator. Thus reusing the good concept of pipeline components > and MDSC. Can't wait! > > Another thing is security. > > yep, "another thing". > > > Now I made my taglib for security but why not specify it in the sitemap? > > For example? The web.xml in J2EE is similar in some ways to the sitemap; in it you can specify security constraints for web resource collections. Protected Area /restricted/* Here you limit HTTP methods in a url pattern. In C2 you could limit views. Anyway security is much bigger than something to put in the sitemap. I am still confused on how it could implemented. Are there any ideas on how C2 must deal with security issues anyone? > > How does it relate to the contracts? > > Which contracts? Sorry, I lost you here. The contracts between programmers, content creators, etc. Who should be in charge of security? Is there another figure that has been missing? > > This is what I am using now: > > > > > > > > if (request.isUserInRole("")) > > { > > > > } > > > > > > > > OFF TOPIC: By the way, I went crazy trying to make security work in Tomcat; > > in the documentation they say they tested it but it doesn't work! In fact it > > is bugged, they froze the wrong code, so to make it work you have to change > > three lines of code and recompile, then all works ok. > > I'm sure the Tomcat people will be very happy to know this. Did you tell > them? > They know well, I found the answer on their mailing list archive (not easilly, really). The fact is that Bugzilla is down and the don't explain this issue on their web page. > > > 6) added the notion of "views" and pipeline "labels". > > > > > > for example > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > where it can be viewed as > > > > > > g -(content)-> t -> s [normal view] > > > +-----> t -> s [schema view] > > > +----------> s [content view] > > > > > > The sitemap allows each "producing" component (generators and > > > transformers) to attach "default labels" to these components so that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is totally equivalent to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if the "parser" generator (which here is default), has attached as > > > default label "content"... such as in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this should allow us to use sitemaps for simple views (such as content > > > or schema) without introducing too much sitemap-creation overhead and > > > reduce readability with a bunch of