cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "J.Pietschmann" <j3322...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: [RT] Cocoon Blocks
Date Tue, 02 Jul 2002 19:04:30 GMT
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Good point.
> 
> +1 for block.xinfo
> 
Hmm. Beyond .xml, .xsl, . xhtml and .fo there ought to
be .xconf, .xmap, .xtarget (yuck!) and now .xinfo
extensions associated with the XML edit mode.
It's getting out of hand.
What's wrong with sitemap.xml and blockinfo.xml?
Rationale
- there is only one web application description file
   in a context, and Sun choose web.xml.
- there is usually only one build description file
   in a context, and Ant uses build.xml. Even though
   multiple build description files could be put into
   the same directory, the usual scope is a "project",
   and "projects" tend to have their own directory
   subtree.
- there is only one sitemap in one context. Even though
   multiple sitemaps could be put into the same
   directory, subsitemaps tend to have their own
   directory  subtree. The situation is quite similar
   to the Ant build description files.
- there should only be one block info in one context
   (the block). Unless I got something very wrong, the
   situation is quite to the web.xml situation.
The .xconf is ok:
- there can be more than one configuration file in
  one context (cocoon, logkit, fop)
- multiple .xcconf files may be in the same directory
- cocoon.xconf is more informative than cocoon.xml,
  and easier to handle that cocoon-config.xml
Caveat: the extension doesn't say anything about the
XML schema used, cocoon.xconf likely needs an other
DTD than logkit.xconf.

HTH
J.Pietschmann


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


Mime
View raw message