[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
I must be doing
something wrong in attempting to communicate with the EPF developer
community. I have sent the following text and file multiple times to the
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx list but it does
not seem to get through. I have noticed that the mailing list is mostly
used for coordination purposes. The wiki seems to be used for the
practices and I am not quite sure how to send inputs concerning the EPF Composer
itself.
I
have written a manual for the EPF Composer, containing installation and
configuration instructions, tutorials and a user manual. It is a draft
version, created from the help files and from the experience gathered while
experimenting with the application. One point bothered me in the
EPF Composer. I would have found it more natural to have the Plug-ins
split into two different types: Method Plug-ins and a Process Plug-ins. It
does not seem natural, once the subject area has been nicely decomposed into an
hierarchical model with sub-areas having their own plug-ins and content
packages, to have to have processes in one of these plug-ins access the method
content in the other plug-ins. The need for the processes to use the
services of an outside service, i.e. a default configuration, to be able to
access the content in the other plug-ins, makes it even more convoluted.
It would be more logical to separate out the processes code from the method
content plug-in into a process plug-in type and move/copy the code from the
configuration’s "Plug-in and Package" selection over to this new plug-in type so
that the process by its very nature can access other method content
plug-ins/packages. The Configuration would then no longer have the hybrid
functions of both providing access assistance to processes and configuration for
publishing. It would seem to be a cleaner separation: the method content
plug-in provides static method content, the process plug-in provides processes
and configuration provides configurations for publishing. It seems
that the authors of EPF Practices have made the same observation, since they
have created a method plug-in with the name of "Process", accessing content
packages in the "Practice" method content
plug-in. Regards, Bjorn
Bjorn Tuft
|
Attachment:
EPF_Installation_Tutorial_User_Manual_20100223_v15.zip
Description: Zip compressed data