Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
From: "Carsten Ziegeler" <cziegeler@s-und-n.de>
To: <dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [RT] A Groovy Kind of Sitemap
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:11:50 +0200
Organization: S&N AG
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-reply-to: <95622F92-E096-11D8-A4E0-000A95DC4186@apache.org>
Thread-Index: AcR0onKi5O2PXFWCTgylvkExEeAZDQAAY/8Q
Message-ID: <OF8210E0A5.FC657B0D-ONC1256EDF.0047C7D1@sundn.de>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"

Ugo Cei wrote:
> 
> Il giorno 28/lug/04, alle 14:15, Carsten Ziegeler ha scritto:
> 
> > But let not implementation details (or technics) drive the syntax.
> > It is more important to have a good sitemap language than to have a 
> > clean and small implementation.
> 
> I beg to disagree. I'm perfectly comfortable with the current 
> sitemap syntax (snide comments about "pointy brackets" aside) 
> and I don't think Cocoon users (i.e. people who should know 
> XML well) should be scared by it.
> 
> It's the implementation that is bugging me: 74 classes are 
> not a small package. Can we do it with less? I hope so.
> 
Hehe, but you suggested both: a new implementation and a new syntax, or?

As I tried to express: I don't care about the implementation (as long
as it works) - we could even do an implementation in C# or whatever.

But I care about the sitemap language.

So, if it is possible to make a clean implementation with Groovy,
yeah, let's do it; but don't change the sitemap language at the
same time. These are two different concerns.

Carsten