lenya-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Hartmann <andr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Workflow history file
Date Thu, 05 Jun 2003 18:57:52 GMT
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> If the WF definition is going to be exported, then the sitemap is the 
> natural mechanism for exporting an URL to resource mapping from Cocoon 
> to the rest of the world. For internal references to a WF definition 
> within a Lenya server, a relative URL could then be used that implicitly 
> uses the cocoon: protocol.

It should be possible to use the workflow engine without Cocoon, e.g.
to invoke scheduled tasks when the servlet engine is down or from the
command line. So it might be a problem to serve the definitions
by Cocoon.

Of course we could think about decoupling the WF engine completely from
the CMS (in a separate Cocoon instance ...), but this is really overkill
at the moment. Nevertheless I will keep the WF engine as separated from
the CMS as possible on the implementation side.

> If the WF definition not is going to be exported, the use of the sitemap 
> would be overkill. Then the entity resolver could be used. Here we have 
> some other questions: where are the WF definitions going to be stored, 
> in one large file or in several files?

In several files.

> If the WF engine is going to be component based, the base URI (or the 
> whole URI) for WF definitions could be defined in the component 
> configuration file. The last part of the URI could be defined in the WF 
> definition file.

This sounds good. The mail archive will preserve these thoughts until
we are going to build the "great standalone workflow engine" :)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org

View raw message