Re: Chameleon Component Summary & Proposal

/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| On 2/16/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
|> This is my summary... so correct me if I'm wrong.
|>
|> We started this discussion because we needed to distinguish between
|> component configuration parameters and parameters to the component
|> itself.
|
| Thank you for restating this
[...]
| Here are the most important objections
| * Configuration parameters could no more be complexType (unless the
| option of allowing configuration parameter to be children is retained)

I don't actually know of any cases where we need them to be complex,
but even if they exist and even if we don't allow configuration
parameter children, the complex types can still be accessed by
reference.

| * How can we define a configuration parameter at runtime ?

You can't.

| * It sounds like the language to define user component will look like
| rocket science

Why?

| * ignore-prefixes : what will happen if a prefix appear in a here document ?

The entire content of a here document is ignored so it won't matter.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.