Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Message-ID: <4006886F.4030309@outerthought.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:32:47 +0100
From: Marc Portier <mpo@outerthought.org>
Organization: Outerthought
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.5) Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/woody/samples/forms
 form2_bind_xml.xml
References: <20040115002126.92894.qmail@minotaur.apache.org>
 <40065361.8060900@outerthought.org> <400678C0.3090808@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <400678C0.3090808@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Joerg Heinicke wrote:

> On 15.01.2004 09:46, Marc Portier wrote:
> 
>>>   Modified:    src/blocks/woody/samples/forms form2_bind_xml.xml
>>>   Log:
>>>   fixes problem with binding sample:
>>>   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107411789000009&r=1&w=2
>>>   Can somebody explain why?
>>
>>
>> sorry my mistake:
>> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/woody/samples/forms/form2_model.xml?r1=1.11&r2=1.12&diff_format=h 
>>
>>
>> when I recently changed the sample to fix the problem with the 
>> bean-binding I overlooked the effect on the xml-binding...
> 
> 
> When searching for the reason of the non-working I looked at 
> form2_xml.xml, line 95:
> 
>     <wd:repeater id="contacts">
>       <wd:widgets>
>         <wd:output id="id">
>           <wd:datatype base="long"/>
>         </wd:output>
> 
> and that's long and I didn't understand why it did not work but after 
> the change in form_bind_xml.xml. Comparing 2 strings like contacts and 
> number can be so difficult :) Yes, now I also understand the reason.
> 

yeah, well, I don't know if it is intended or not, but I do hear the 
underlaying message: we need some better tools for this kind of stuff, no?

maybe on relative short term some 'validator' could be made that checks 
if id's and datatypes are in sync between woody definition, binding and 
template files?  That could give upfront some more in depth warnings 
then the runtime environment allows...

in any case, it's just an idea, not a promise I'll start making that :-)

regards,
-marc=
-- 
Marc Portier                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at                http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/
mpo@outerthought.org                              mpo@apache.org