cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carsten Ziegeler" <>
Subject RE: [Fortress] How to get the role of a component in an Accessor?
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:57:58 GMT
Unico Hommes wrote:
> > 
> > But there are some problems:
> > 1) Compatibility. We have SitemapConfigurable in 2.1 and I 
> > would really like
> >    to be compatible in this area.
> OK, agreed. We need support for it in 2.2.
> > 2) The identifier for the component used in the sitemap is currently
> >    "global-variables", the name of the input module is "global".
> >    Regardless which of the two you change, you end up in an 
> > incompatibility
> >    again, I think.
> > 
> Do you think cocoon.xconf in 2.2 should be compatible with 2.1?

> For instance input modules are now declared in cocoon.xconf version 2.1
> as follows:
> <input-modules>
>   <component-instance name="global" src=".." />
> In cocoon.xconf I have been using:
> <global-input id="global" />
> instead.
> Btw. the name of the global input module in cocoon.xconf ("global")
> refers to its id (hint) not the shorthand you use to declare the
> component. Right?
> Anyway, I think it should be possible to have more than one shorthand
> for a given component by declaring a role mapping in cocoon.roles for
> it. That way both <global-variables> and <global-input> can be used to
> declare the input module.
Hmm, ok.

This issue is something I encountered today while trying to get the
global input module running. Adding the global-variables component
in the cocoon.roles file wasn't enough. I also had to add a
<global-variables id="global-variables"/> to the cocoon.xconf as well
which imho is not very good.

In general, I think we should stick to the 2.1 syntax of cocoon.xconf
for compatibility reasons and not introduce more complexity. I personally 
don't know what this line <global-variables id="global-variables"/> 
actually does and why the entry in the cocoon.roles is not sufficient.
But perhaps this is only a transition matter


View raw message