cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: Link view goodness (Re: residuals of MIME type bug ?)
Date Sun, 29 Jun 2003 06:03:37 GMT
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 03:38:55PM +0100, Upayavira wrote:
> Okay. How about defining a namespace <links:link href="xxxx"/> which
> gets consumed by the transformer, that way you choose in your
> previous XSLT which links you want to be spidered by presenting the
> links in that <links> namespace (and then repeat them for the sake
> of the output).

Sounds good.  So you mean, eg, transforming <a href="..."> into <a
href="..." link:href="...">, and the gather-links transformer uses
the link:href attribute?

> Now the only question that remains is whether to have an implicit
> gatherer if no explicit one is specified. I'd probably say no, as
> other discussions have erred away from hidden things like that.


> I think that telling the sitemap where your links are is a pretty
> reasonable adjustment to your site. In fact, we could have two
> transformers - one that just looks for hrefs and xlinks, and another
> that uses a links namespace - the former would make it real easy to
> convert your site for spidering, and the latter providing a method
> to do complex link management.

+1, was just going to suggest that.

> Another question - do we still leave link view (two pass) link
> following in the CLI? Or does this method deprecate and thus replace
> it?

I still have the feeling that a link-gatherer transformer is mixing
concerns a bit, and that two-pass is conceptually nicer:

- We're abusing the name 'transformer', since nothing is transformed.
  If we're really going to go this way, let's define a new sitemap
  element, <map:link-gatherer/>.
- Link gathering is irrelevant for online situations, so we pay some
  performance penalty having a link-gatherer transformer.  This
  illustrates why I think it mixes concerns.
- It's easy to forget to define a link-gatherer transformer for new
  pipelines.  Link-view is cross-cutting and doesn't have this

I'm not very familiar with the code; is there some cost in keeping the
two-pass CLI alive, in the faint hope that caching comes to its rescue
one day?

> Thanks for engaging with me on this - I appreciate it.

Thank _you_; an improved CLI will make Forrest significantly more


> Regards, Upayavira

View raw message