11 Aug
2009
11 Aug
'09
4:17 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
On Aug 11, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
I'd agree to use rendering but *only* if:
* It's integrated inside the xwiki-rendering module
* It's implemented as a XWiki Parser and Renderer (and thus we
introduce a syntax for it)
I think it could fit well in the xwiki-rendering module. We'll need to
adjust a few things (since it would be the first renderer to generate
binary data) but that's a good thing.
WDYT?
Well, it doesn't actually do parsing or rendering. The code is really
small, and it just forwards the text to a service, which returns the
binary blob.
But I don't understand why do you insist on this conflict between image
rendering and text rendering?
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
Q: Is the
macro name appropriate? Do you know of a better one?
Point taken: formula is better
than equation. Actually, initially it
was
named "formula", but I didn't like it that much. Anyway, the community
has spoken.
Point not taken: rendering is the right name IMO. Before xwiki-
rendering
as a syntax converter, rendering has a widely accepted sense as
generating raster graphics. From Wikipedia: "Rendering is the
process of
generating an image from a model, by means of computer programs". This
is what the module does, and the fact that we have another thing
called
"rendering" doesn't mean that we must invent new names for something
standard.