cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <sylv...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Cocoon Forms namespaces (was: [SUMMARY] From Woody to Cocoon Forms 1.0)
Date Fri, 05 Mar 2004 18:26:22 GMT
Reinhard Pötz wrote:

> Marc Portier wrote:
>
>> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>>
>>> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>>
>>>> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tim Larson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> +1 'cforms' instead of just 'forms'
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm +1 for "forms" only - as Vadim pointed out, it's "Cocoon" is 
>>>>> obvious because it's within the Cocoon CVS.
>>>>> WDOT?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, we (where we stands for Vadim, Tim, Bertrand, and Rolf) had a 
>>>> little chat on IRC and agreed on the following:
>>>>
>>>>   Block Title: Cocoon Forms, or Cocoon Forms 1.0
>>>>   Block Name: cforms
>>>>   Package: org.apache.cocoon.cforms
>>>>   Namespace: http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0
>>>
>>>
>>
>> sorry for missing the argumentation on keeping the 'forms' here, or 
>> is this a typo?
>>
>>>>   NS Prefix: fd
>>>
>>>
>> and similar for binding and templating I presume? we might question 
>> if reordering the sub-domain and version-no is not more natural then:
>>
>> xmlns:fd=http://apache.org/cocoon/cforms/1.0/definition
>> xmlns:fb=http://apache.org/cocoon/cforms/1.0/binding
>
>
> I like it, but I'm no specialist on those things.


I think we should keep the version number at the end. What if, in the 
lifetime of Cocoon forms 1.0 (the general design of it), a new binding 
approach emerges that leads us to use another namespace?

Will it be http://apache.org/cocoon/cforms/1.0/binding/1.1? Looks ugly ;-)

It should be http://apache.org/cocoon/cforms/binding/1.1, that will work 
with http://apache.org/cocoon/forms/definition/1.0.

I'm still undecided however about the use of "forms" or "cforms" in the 
namespace (had no time for IRC today - sorry). Won't it be strange to 
have ".../forms/.../1.0" use classes in the "cforms" package and 
".../forms/.../2.0" use classes in the "zforms" package? Don't know. 
"forms" may be good after all to enforce that there can be only one 
official form framework at a given time.

BTW, good to see you back, Marc!

Sylvain

-- 
Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }


Mime
View raw message