cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [SUMMARY] From Woody to Cocoon Forms 1.0
Date Fri, 05 Mar 2004 18:24:57 GMT
Marc Portier wrote:

> another argument for having [cforms] from my side was that you could 
> never confuse it with the known english word 'form' that could mean an 
> HTML form, a paper-form, a whatever formalism or whatnot... in 
> discussions on these lists, and thus possibly introducing confusion that 
> can be avoided

I find myself selfdebating here.

I'm 60% on forms "everywhere" and 40% on +1 the proposal.

the reason for using "forms" everywhere is that I want people to fight 
for having their features in, instead of going their own way with 
another block.

Scratchpad blocks are awesome as a way to cover new ground and propose 
new functionality, but once we start supporting them officially, well, 
the things change.

This is why the name change:

  - woody was a proposal
  - Cocoon Forms are *the way* cocoon is going to handle forms from now on

in a few years, there might be nothing left from woody in Cocoon Forms.

Now, as I was explaining in IRC today, the scenario I want to avoid is 
people coming up with, say "sforms" or "cform++" or "cform#" and branch off.

This is my *only* concern.

I would go "forms" all the way, in everything: namespaces and package 
names... but Marc is right: "form" is too general as a term. We could do 
it with sitemap or flowscript because they were descriptive yet special 
enough. Forms clearly not descriptive enough.

So, let's go over the proposal again:

   Block Title: Cocoon Forms, or Cocoon Forms 1.0

+1 for Cocoon Forms (no need to mention the version now)

   Block Name: cforms

+1, I would like forms better but we need to state cforms somewhere

   Package: org.apache.cocoon.cforms

here I would go "forms" instead. package naming is where the estate 
really is, where class collissions might happen.

   Namespace: http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0

+1

   NS Prefix: fd

+0, doesn't really matter.

So, to sum up, here is my proposal:

   --------------------------------------------------------
   Block Title: Cocoon Forms
   Block Name: cforms
   Package: org.apache.cocoon.forms
   Namespace: http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0
   --------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Stefano.


Mime
View raw message