On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> > As I have been confused by all those suggestions you can find a summary
> > here:
> > http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=FlowSitemapIntegration
>
> Cool summary, really helps a lot. And here the cool voting matrix :)
>
>
> | A | B | C | D | E |
> ----|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
> | | | | | |
> V1 | -1 | +0 | +0 | +.5 | +1 |
> | | | | | |
> V2 | +1 | -1 | -0 | +.5 | -1 |
> | | | | | |
> V3 | ?? | +.5 | -1 | \ | \ |
> | | | | | |
> V4 | \ | -1 | -0 | \ | \ |
> | | | | | |
> V5 | \ | +1 | +.5 | \ | \ |
> | | | | | |
> V6 | \ | \ | -1 | \ | \ |
> | | | | | |
> V7 | \ | \ | +1 | \ | \ |
> | | | | | |
> ----|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
>
>
> What is the difference between A V1 and A V2? Only the <map:flows/>? And
> what does it mean?
>
> B V5 was missing. From Marc's answer I guess he meant this, but chooses V1.
Don't you think that this makes the voting really difficult ;-)
A: V1
B: V2
C: V1 with flow instead of type
D: V2
E: V2
BTW, I think it too early to vote on this. If I must decide now,
all will be carved in stone. I think we should leave A-C as it is
for 2.1. And postpone the discussion to the post-2.1-era.
For my part, I must have first two implementations to find
more generalized contract, which we don't have at this point.
So my vote would like:
Should we postpone the generalisation to the post-2.1-era,
and hazard with the consequences, that we maybe change the
sitemap syntax of a released version of Cocoon?
+1
Stephan.
|