Grzegorz Kossakowski skrev:
Daniel Fagerstrom pisze:
Reinhard Poetz skrev:
...
For the use case we are discussing, the assumption is that the caller
of the servlets generator is not connected to all the servlet
services. Thus we cannot use the servlet: protocol that by design
assumes an explicit named connection.
But we already agreed to implement referencing by block id in servlet:
source, right?
No, we are still in the phase of finding a good design.
So we need a protocol that allows (webapp) global servlet service URIs
anyway. And then we could as well make it listable as a source is
usable in more contexts than a generator.
I think it's time to support Reinhard :-)
I agree with his opinion that servlets: source is not needed at the
moment and generator will be sufficient. I didn't like servlets: source
from the beginning and that was the reason why I wanted to integrate
it's planned functionality with servlet: source.
Having a source that is listable only for one URL (servlets:/) is
awkward idea IMO.
I can agree about that it isn't the neatest design I have seen. But from
an API POV, there is nothing strange with it. A listable Source returns
a list of Sources, there is no restrictions on that the listed Sources
should be of the same type or listable.
/Daniel
