cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vadim Gritsenko" <vadim.gritse...@verizon.net>
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL] Ref: Bug 7713 - Optional Implicit precondtion checking in matchers
Date Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:05:40 GMT
> From: Michael Melhem [mailto:michaelm@fztig938.bank.dresdner.net]
> 
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:03:22PM +0100, Stuart Roebuck wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, April 3, 2002, at 12:00 PM, Michael Melhem wrote:
> >
> > >Hi everyone,
> > >
> > >I trust you all had a good easter break :-)
> > >
> > >This is a propasal for the introduction of implicit precondition
> > >checking
> > >in matchers. Please refer to Bug 7713 for more information!!
> > >You can find the patch for this proposal as a part of Bug 7713.
> > >
> > >Here  I outline some of the reasoning for this proposal...
> > >
> > >While writing a large c2 based application we have come to the
> > >conclusion that matchers with built-in *implicit* checks would be
> > >desirable.
> > >
> > >For Example, instead of using a "valid session checker action"
> > >in *every* single pipeline in the sitemap to secure against clients
> > >who do not have sessions, we simply configure a  matcher with a
> > >"session-exists precondition". That way, we simplify sitemap
pipelines,
> > >which we find are already too large and complex.
> > >
> > >There are several advantages with implicit matcher checking
including,
> > >simplified sitemaps, scalablity, easier development with developers
> > >not having to remember to always include certian actions, hiding of
> > >unnecessary and repetitive information, etc
> > >
> > >Of course precondition matchers are not useful in every situation,
> > >but are of best advantage when ones finds themselves using the
> > >same general actions in a lot of the sitemap pipelines.
> > >
> > >Any comments?
> >
> > From your description it sounds like existing facility for embedding
> > match statements might do the trick:
> >
> > 	<map:match pattern="*">
> > 		<map:act type="let-the-person-in">
> >
> > 			<map:match pattern="match1">
> > 				...
> > 			</map:match>
> >
> > 			<map:match pattern="match2">
> > 				...
> > 			</map:match>
> >
> > 			...
> > 		</map:act>
> > 	</map:match>
> >
> > Stuart.
> 
> Hi stuart,
> 
> Thanks for your input.
> 
> Yes, you are correct, one could *explicitly* use actions and
> embedded matchers to do the same thing.
> 
> However when the "map:act type=let-the-person-in" is generic, say
> "let-the-person-in-if-they-have-a-session", then it would seem to me,
to
> make more sense for that check to be done implicitly as part of the
> match.
> 
> Otherwise you could clutter your sitemap with
> <map:act type=let-the-person-in> in almost every pipeline.

Michael,

Have you considered using just one pipeline? Or two (and no more than
two)?


> This is not a good thing, especially if you have lots of complex
pipelines.

Here I fail to see how this is much simpler than using action. Why not
just:

...
 
<map:act type="let-person-in-if-they-have-session">
 
> 	<map:match pattern="URI1*">
> 		...
> 	</map:match>
> 
> 	<map:match pattern="URI2*">
> 		...
> 	</map:match>
> 
> 	...

</map:act>


Vadim


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message