forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject [Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Sitemap woes and semantic linking]
Date Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:42:45 GMT

The original message hasn't yet gone through...

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Sitemap woes and semantic linking
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:01:15 +0100
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicolaken@apache.org>
Reply-To: nicolaken@apache.org
Organization: Apache Software Foundation
To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
References: 
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0212121445480.1631-100000@oxygen.internal.luminas.co.uk>



Andrew Savory wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Jeff Turner wrote:
> 
> 
>>Forget this idea that httpd is optional.  Put it right in the centre,
>>use it for URI management and static resource handling, and delegate to
>>Cocoon only the things Cocoon is good at handling.
> 
> I can see the sense in that ... although it does assume that everything is
> going to be coming and going via HTTP. But as I can't think of any sane
> alternatives, that seems reasonable ;-)

IMO this should be transparent to the container(s) and not compulsory.
I should not *rely* on this, but could use it if I wanted to get a speed
boost.

>>But it's not a protocol, it's a 'scheme' :)  Everyone makes this mistake
>>(thanks to Marc for pointing it out).
> 
> Ah, gotcha, thanks. I see the point now.
> 
>>So when you see <link href="java:org.apache.myproj.MyClass">, the 'java:'
>>bit is simply telling the link processor that "org.apache.myproj.MyClass"
>>is to be interpreted as a Java resource identifier.
>>
>>>(That's not to say I'm in favour of the +uml notation either...
>>
>>Oh, that 'text/html+javadoc' was a wild guess at what a Javadoc MIME type
>>might be, based on the observation that the SVG MIME type is
>>'text/xml+svg'
> 
> Ok. Again, my misunderstanding of your intention -- I thought you were
> aiming to add bits to MIME types, rather than using a specific "javadoc"
> type.

Yes, we had basically all come to this non-obvious consensus, after a
long and profitable discussion.
I want the same thing to happen on current open issues.

> Thanks for the explanations!

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
              - verba volant, scripta manent -
     (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message