cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: [RT] Using modifiers within Cocoon components
Date Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:49:18 GMT

On Thursday, Oct 9, 2003, at 14:00 Europe/Rome, Geoff Howard wrote:

> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>> Le Jeudi, 1 jan 1970, à 13:40 Europe/Zurich, Stefano Mazzocchi a 
>> écrit :
>>>> ...We could use the same syntax for the so called interal pipelines
>>>> <map:pipeline modifier="private">
>>>> [...]
>>>> We could use two different component managers for each sitemap to 
>>>> manage
>>>> these components, this should make the lookup easier.
>>> I like this as well. internal-only="true" sounds hacky.
>> +1, but someone mentioned using
>>   access="private"
>> instead, which is clearer.
>> "modifier" does not convey the exact meaning.
> I like access="private" and access="public".
> - Which is the default if none is specified? (public)

it would be back incompatible, but defaulting to private would be 
better from an evolutionary perspective.

> Hmmm, on second thought,
> uri access : @internal-only
> block access : @access
> are these two orthoganal concepts named deceptively in the case of 
> pipelines?

I think so, yes.

>  @access is not meant to imply whether a pipeline can be accessed but 
> whether it can be extended or used outside the block.


> If
> we never envision anything other than private/public would something 
> like block-private="true" convey more meaning? block-access="private" 
> might do the same but leave freedom for other than private/public.

random though, but you could think of "protected" as exposed to 
extending blocks but not outside that extending block (maybe to allow a 
different style of wrapping), while "private" is not exposed to 
extending blocks and public

so, leaving block-access="" (on both components and pipelines) is 
probably a better idea.


View raw message