Mailing-List: contact lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Lenya Developers List" <lenya-dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Message-ID: <3EDF54D9.6080309@nada.kth.se>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 16:34:01 +0200
From: Daniel Fagerstrom <danielf@nada.kth.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lenya Developers List <lenya-dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Workflow history file
References: <bbkc5b$504$1@main.gmane.org> <3EDF3318.2060407@nada.kth.se>
 <bbncs4$p2i$1@main.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Andreas Hartmann wrote:

> Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: 

...

>
>> I would propose to use an URI to identify a WF definition, it is the 
>> standard way of refering to resources at the web and for some 
>> applications it probably makes sense to publish the WF definition as 
>> well and in that case an URI is a natural way to find it.
>
>
> Yes, that sounds very reasonable. Then we need a way to map such URIs
> to workflow definitions. Is the entity catalog appropriate for this?

Might be, I don't know much about the entity catalog.

I think an important question is if WF definitions only are used 
internally withi Lenya or if it would be appropriate to export WF 
definitions to other Lenya based servers. I.e. for using a number of 
standardized WF definitions within an organization. I don't have enough 
knowlege about your usecases to have an opinion about that.

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.

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?

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.

>
>> If the WF history is separate from the WF instance, the WF history 
>> should refer to the instance identifier as well.
>
>
> That is done by the location of the history file - the path is equal
> to the document ID (= WF instance). 

ok

...

/Daniel


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