Re: possible bug in p:iteration select

"Josh Matthews" <joshmatthews@gmail.com> writes:
>> Yes, but can't do that because you can also put p:pipe in there to
>> specify the context and that would just get too confusing.
>
> Do you mean confusing for users or confusing for
> implementors? <p:with-option> can already take a <p:empty>, <p:pipe>,
> <p:document>, <p:inline>, and <p:data>... I tend to think it's more
> intuitive for users to have the flexibility to nest anything in an input
> element and have it treated as input. It's probably very subjective, but I
> personally find having to overload the select XPath expression with a quoted
> string more confusing than being able to nest a text node.

But it would lead to very messy edge cases. What does this mean:

<p:with-option name="something">
  Now this is a
  <p:pipe step="main" port="source"/>
  test.
</p:with-option>

How is that different from this:

<p:with-option name="something">
  Now this is a
  <h:div>Some randome content</h:div>
  test.
</p:with-option>

or this:

<p:with-option name="something">
  Now this is a
  <h:div>
    Some randome content
    <p:pipe step="main" port="source"/>
  </h:div>
  test.
</p:with-option>

Personally, I'd like to make it possible to put content inside these elements
too, and I'd like them to be able to accept structure, not just strings, but
that doesn't look like something we're going to do in V1.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | It is well to remember that the entire
http://nwalsh.com/            | universe, with one trifling exception,
                              | is composed of others.--John Andrew
                              | Holmes