forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: [views] Dir specific view
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:03:17 GMT
Thorsten Scherler wrote:

>>Question 1:
>>Do you see a problem with having the same fallback mechanism that you 
>>have created for the *.ft files?
> Actually that is possible. 
> ...but you mean *.fv (forrest:views), or? 
> ...or better ask you mean the mechanism I implemented with the
> viewLocationmap.xml? In this case it would be viewTemplatesmap, or?

I have no idea what you mean by "viewLocationmap.xml". I'll come back to 
you when I have had chance to understand this work.

I *think* we are talking about the same thing, but I can't comment on 
your solution because I'm not fully up to speed with views yet. Since 
ApacheCon is now only a week away I will spend some time this week 
really understanding your code. Then we can attack these issues 

>>Question 2:
>>Should we merge all this stuff together into a single document so the 
>>templates are defined in the *.fv file? We can then add a 
>><forrest:import src="default.fv"> and override elements within that (as 
>>we do in XSL). This would reduce the number of files quite considerably 
>>and make editing by hand much easier (at least I believe so)
> Hmm, what do you mean? I am unsure whether I understood you right. Right
> now we splitting things apart for easy maintainment but on the other
> hand you want to merge them again? 

The separation we wanted was to get meta-data and view-config separate. 
However, we now seem to be going to the opposite extreme of a single 
file for everything, we now have one file for each tiny peice of 
functionality. This would be fine if we had a GUI doing all our editing, 
but doing it by hand is a pain. That is, the separation is no longer 
along the lines of meta-data and view data (which you have achieved 
nively with contracts and views), things have gone a step further, to 
separating the meta data for each individual template.

I'm wondering if we should take a leaf out of XSLs book where we have:

<xsl:template name="aTemplate">

<xsl:template name="anotherTemplate">

<xsl:template name="yetAnotherTemplate">

(this is the equivalent of view contracts)

These are then used as:

<xsl:call-template name="aTemplate"/>


Using the <xsl:import...> element we can group contracts together for 
easy management.


View raw message