cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RT]: Names for pipeline components section
Date Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:11:42 GMT
Michael Melhem wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:21:36AM -0500, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> 
>>Michael Melhem wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 09:48:15AM -0500, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Michael Melhem wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>    
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I recall suggesting map:pipe in an earlier discussion because it
>>>>>>would confirm to "noun-verb" convention that already exists in 
>>>>>>the sitemap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>... the only problem being that also pipe is a noun, it does not mean 
>>>>"somebody who makes pipelines". Currently, generator is "somebody who 
>>>>generates", transformer is "somebody who transforms", etc.
>>>>
>>>>But "pipe" noun does not describe an actor, "pipe" is passive... "Piper" 
>>>>could be better but it means "somebody who plays pipe"...
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yes generally "pipe" is a noun...but how about "to pipe something through"
>>>in this context it would be a verb .... 
>>>
>>
>>... this will result in "pipe" (n) - "pipe" (v) pair ... we made a circle :)
>>
>>So, options for the pair are:
>>
>>pipeline - pipeline (existing)
>>pipe - pipeline
>>pipeline - pipe
>>processor - process
>>piper - pipe
>>...
>>
>>Other suggestions?
> 
> 
> I was actually thinking:
> 
>  <components>
>    <map:matchers>
>    </map:matchers>
>  
>    <map:pipelines>
>     <map:pipeline/>
>    </map:pipelines>
>  </components>
>  ..
> 
>  <map:pipes>
>    <map:pipe>
>      <map:act>
>      <map:match>
>      ...
>    </map:pipe>
> 
>    <map:pipe>
>    </map:pipe>
>  </map:pipes>
> 
> thats my suggestion anyway :)

I'm sorry, but I'm -1 on such a severe back incompatible change for a 
simple naming reason. That would be a great way to piss people off (at 
least, I would be)

Besides, I already explained why <pipe> as a component and <pipeline> as 
a sitemap concept make sense and keep back compatibility.

Sitemap 1.1 should be extending Sitemap 1.0, not provide any 
back-incompatible change, otherwise this is really sitemap 2.0 and I 
woundn't like that.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi                               <stefano@apache.org>
--------------------------------------------------------------------



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


Mime
View raw message