On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 09:06:48PM +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: ... > >The 'sitemap' matcher then assembles a sitemap unique to the current > >project. We can have configuration files which direct the assembly of > >the sitemap, or even inspect the xdocs themselves (if a community/ > >directory is present, pull in community/* matchers). This way, we can > >get rid of all those hacky resource-exists checks. > > Hacky or not, they are conceptually needed. Your solution still checks > for a resource-exists, but it does it "statically". Your proposal is > tightly binded with the resource-exists thing. *Something* has to examine the files and construct a sitemap, but it wouldn't be a resource-exists action. Probably some sort of Libre-like generator to generate a map of the filesystem with type info, which could then be converted to a sitemap. > >I don't know how kindly the sitemap engine would take this kind of abuse. > >If it had to regenerate a subsitemap for each request, things would > >certainly be too slow. > > Resource-exists "does it" but inside a sitemap. The concept is equivalent. > > >At the moment, 's src attribute doesn't allow for arbitrary > >Sources, but I imagine that could be fixed. > > Hmmm... > > >Thoughts? > > Well, as usual I do the "divide et impera" refrain. ;-P > > 1 - break cocoon sitemap in snippets of functionality > - This is what blocks will be for. > - we can use entity includes now, and this could also > make stefano, who is active now, work faster on blocks ;-P > > 2 - make it easy for users to add stuff to the pipeline > - this would make it possible for users to add stuff to > the sitemap without exposing it. AOP sitemap. > the point is that Cocoon sitemap should remain > strictly hierarchical for consistency reasons. > So with 1 solved, the main one will be easier to > read and can be completely exposed without fears of > it being too messy. Good point. > 3 - make a better resource-exists. > - the resource-exists paradigm is part of the easy way > forrest makes it possible to do many things for users. > It's the *same* conceptual thing as CAPs. > what we need is to make it more clever WRT caching and > source indipendent. > > 4 - make the CAP selector accept an external document for defining > the DTDs, and an action that gets the relevant stylesheets > definitions for the conversion from *DTD 2 DocumentDTD11. If we used: ... Then users could add new filetype support simply by creating a new *2document.xsl stylesheet. --Jeff