Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-51612-apmail-cocoon-dev-archive=cocoon.apache.org@cocoon.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 66826 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2003 11:20:23 -0000
Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Nov 2003 11:20:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 12602 invoked by uid 500); 18 Nov 2003 11:19:53 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 12555 invoked by uid 500); 18 Nov 2003 11:19:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@cocoon.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 12539 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2003 11:19:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO out009.verizon.net) (206.46.170.131)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Nov 2003 11:19:52 -0000
Received: from verizon.net ([209.237.227.194]) by out009.verizon.net
          (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP
          id <20031118112006.YFPL1305.out009.verizon.net@verizon.net>
          for <dev@cocoon.apache.org>; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:20:06 -0600
Message-ID: <3FBA0061.1020904@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:20:01 -0500
From: Vadim Gritsenko <vadim.gritsenko@verizon.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: DOM Protocol, Was: Revised ResourceLoadAction posted...
References: <3FB24D0B.19520.D90937@localhost> <bou8im$e2m$1@sea.gmane.org>
    <3FB2B3A0.1070700@verizon.net> <3FB2C6F8.9080502@virbus.de>
    <3FB2CA0D.7080504@verizon.net>
 <1535.213.100.91.216.1068756815.squirrel@webmail.nada.kth.se>
 <3FB8F7B3.9050408@verizon.net> <bpcolg$jtp$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <bpcolg$jtp$1@sea.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out009.verizon.net from
 [209.237.227.194] at Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:20:05 -0600
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Sylvain Wallez wrote:

> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
>> My initial though was to have following syntax:
>>
>>    dom:[request|session|context]:<attribute-name>#<jxpath>
>>
>> Xpath, and '#' symbol is obviously optional, and '#' was chosen for 
>> consistency with existing xmldb: protocol.
>
>
>
> Just some thoughts:
> - why "dom" only? We should also allow XMLizable objects.


"dom" is good and short protocol name. XMLizable can be (and should be) 
easily supported, too. I thought of JXPath, actually, which would 
support Java Beans and collections too.


> - what about using input modules?


Good idea! Do we have upload module already? This will quickly deprecate 
part: protocol :)


> We already have some modules that give access to all the 
> above-mentioned attributes and more. This avoids code duplication, 
> improves consistency and allows further extension by simply adding new 
> input-modules.
>
> Considering this, we should find another name for the protocol: 
> "input-module" (too long), "module" (not significant enough), 
> "xml-module" (better)?


Still long ;-) How about "xmodule"? :)


> And then the protocol syntax becomes:
>  xml-module:<module-name>:<attribute-name>#<jxpath>
>
> E.g. "xml-module:session-attr:purchase-order#item[1]"


xmodule:session:purchase-order#item[1] is even better ;-)

Vadim