Thorsten Scherler wrote: > El lun, 21-11-2005 a las 12:04 +0000, Ross Gardler escribió: > ... > >>>>>>The question is how can we make contracts more generic. One way is to >>>>>>get rid of head|body="true|false". I thought that each contract has to >>>>>>provide this information from the resulting transformation. >> >>... >> >> >>>>How about: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>... >> >> >>>Assuming forrest:hook will be transformed to div id="test" the location >>>would be >>>xpath="html/body/div[@id='test']" >>> >>>I call this xpath structure aware, because >>>it is more a xpath prefix then a fixed location. >>> >>>Now think you would add >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>That should not be aware of the structure. It should be insert in the >>>fixed location "html/head" otherwise you would get invalid markup. >>> >>>To solve this problem I would like to propose to add an attribute >>>fixedLocation="true|false". So this makes >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>I propose to make the default fixedLocation="false". That means the >>>content will be injected in the overall structure defined by the >>>structurer (*.fv), the content is structure aware. >> > > A similar problem is with hooks. Till now we assumed that all hooks go > into /html/body but this need to be more flexible. I propose to add a > new attribute @hooksXpath to the forrest:view. I'm not sure I can see a use case for this, I'll respond assuming you have one, but an example may help. > > > > > > that will be transformed into > > > > > > > I propose this attribute @hooksXpath as required. This makes the assumption that all hooks are to be placed in the same location within the output file. Can we safely make that assumption? Can we imagine a situation where we have a single view defining hooks that go into a different place? If not then you proposal is good. Ross