Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <B6352CB87AA70442A1C6F49E6B658C9875BFCA@postman.flagship.ru>
From: Piroumian Konstantin <KPiroumian@protek.com>
To: "'cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org'" <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Chaining order (Re: [VOTE] Input module chaining)
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 18:28:49 +0400 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de] 
> Jeff Turner wrote:
> 
> > > >
> > > Just a silly question: are you joking or do you consider this 
> > > seriously?
> >
> > Absolutely :) See the other thread. It separates two 
> concerns that are 
> > currently mixed, and makes module implementation _much_ simpler. I 
> > think Chris, Konstantin and I are all very happy with it. Now's the 
> > time to raise objections..
> >
> Yes, ok, if you are all happy with this...I can't stop you 
> from doing this. I personally don't like the concept, because 
> the configuration is static in the cocoon.xconf - I don't see 
> this in the sitemap.
> 
> And yes: I still believe in SoC, which means a usual Cocoon 
> user has only to edit (and know) the sitemap - he should not 
> care about the cocoon.xconf.

Configuration of input modules is a little different matter. If you have
good suggestions on how to configure them in the sitemap then nobody will
have objections, I think. What we couldn't agree on all this time was the
modularity and module chaining implementation. Jeff, Chris, am I wrong?

Konstantin

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

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