Re: Parameters redux

On 5/14/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> [...]
> Maybe I've overlooked some corners, but this seems better to me
> than the current status-quo.

Let me start with a simple question: in what use cases would you use
parameters vs. options in pipelines? My understanding is that
parameters are used in pipelines (just like in components) in cases
where we don't know the names in advance. When we know the names in
advance, we will use options instead. Is this correct?

I imagine a case where a pipeline receives a set of name/value pairs
for HTTP headers and name/value pairs to be used as HTTP request
parameters. The pipeline needs to call a first step passing only the
HTTP headers parameters. How would it do that? One way was to have
each set of parameters in a different namespace, and have a way in the
pipeline language to pass all the parameters in a particular namespace
to a step. Another way is to use a structured document instead of
parameters, both at the pipeline level and at the component level.

But I don't see how parameter groups are help here, because it looks
like we are trying to deal  with parameters which names are not known
in advance, and this conflicts with parameter groups which require
parameters in the group to be named.

Alex
-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web 2.0 Forms for the Enterprise
http://www.orbeon.com/

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2007 09:16:52 UTC