cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Portier <...@outerthought.org>
Subject Re: [Woody] - <wd:hotkey> status?
Date Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:07:13 GMT


Antonio Gallardo wrote:

> Marc Portier dijo:
> 
>>well, I do think it does make sense to go for wi:label
>>
>>Thinking about it in some abstract terms, we could look at the wd-file
>>as some kind of a class definition, with all of its declared fields as
>>some kind of member-variable declarations
> 
> 
> The decision is hard to take. I thought the definition file is related to
> a form definition. Under this context it is correct to have an accesskey
> related to the label.
> 

yes.

please understand that if I'm suggesting wi:label en wi:acceskey (and 
same for Sylvain I persume) we are not suggesting to put this 
information in another place then the current definition file

this is just pass-through information that is common for all instances, 
and therefore the suggestion could be to change from wd:label to 
wi:label in the definition file (and the i18n case with embedded 
wi:accesskey offers some argumentation if you ask me)

it is the same as having a wi:styling and a wi:group elements inside the 
template-file



hm, maybe the confusion comes from which value we attach to the action 
of XML-namespacing.

in my head xml namespaces are mapping to devided semantic domains, 
saying something like 'this element has meaning inside this context'

so what I am trying to say is that namespaces are not meant IMHO to map 
onto the created SoC (they often do, but doesn't seem to be a 
requirement AFAICS).

As such I think that a distinct responsibility/role in the system could 
include making statements or reacting on statements that are built up of 
concepts from different semantic domains

or in other words: if the form-designer-role is speaking about 
design-elements that are shared between all instances, then he probably 
should do that rather in the wi namespace?


IMHO, allowing to mix namespaces in one XML file is the whole reasoning 
behind having them in the first place?


just my 2c.
(hoping it lowered confusion rather then adding to it)
-marc=

> 
>>however, this 'label' and 'accesskey' stuff rather takes up the
>>equivalent role of 'static' variables that are shared across all
>>instances of the same class.
> 
> 
> Another thing is a general datatype repository (similiar like the one in
> XReports). I thought it is a good idea too, but it must be just as a
> helper to avoid is write the same datatypes over and over.
> 
> 
>>hm, just a way to look at it I guess?
> 
> 
> :-D
> 
>>
>><snip topic="more agreement on wi:accesskey inside wi:label"/>
> 
> 
> I prefer wd:accesskey inside wd:label.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Antonio Gallardo
> 

-- 
Marc Portier                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at              http://radio.weblogs.com/0116284/
mpo@outerthought.org                              mpo@apache.org


Mime
View raw message