More continuation scope questions ... [was: <map:flow> scope?]
Steven D. Majewski <sdm7g <at> virginia.edu>
2008-02-01 19:43:59 GMT
On Jan 29, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Steven D. Majewski wrote:
> Are the <map:flow><map:script> values inherited by sub sitemaps
> like the component configurations, or are they local to a sitemap ?
> Can I put all of the <map:script> declarations in my top level
> sitemap and use <map:call> in the sub sitemaps ?
I didn't get any answers on this question, but initial testing (as
well as a close parsing of some of the docs) seems to indicate
that the declarations are local to a sitemap.
I was getting invalid continuation errors on testing some flowscript
after I added a link for the continuation to a sendPageAndWait() page.
In the parent sitemap, I have a match for '**/*.kont' , which calls
I changed that to match on '*.kont' , as well as previously adding
the same to the child sitemap. ( Initially just adding it, before
changing the parent match didn't fix the problem -- the parent sitemap
catching it seems to be what makes it invalid! )
Now it works, however that change has broken some previously working
stuff that seems to require keeping some relative path info in the
continuation uri's. ( Perhaps I can fix that by using an HTML <BASE>
instead, but I think there was a problem with propagating that value
to other generated content. )
So it appears that the continuation uri must resolve back to the same
sitemap that originated the initial flowscript call. ( Or: is the
problem only going upstream ? Will it work parent-to-child, but not
child-to-parent ? )
( Parent and child sitemaps all have the same scripts listed in the
<map:flow> block. )
Can anyone confirm that this is correct ?
Or is there some other source for the problems I'm seeing.
[ Any other tips on understanding the flowscript processing model
will be appreciated. ]
-- Steve Majewski / UVA Alderman Library