I like your idea -- using Mav to process the correct html page: query or 
report.  I changed my code to that way and it's much cleaner.  Thanks!
Dan

At 10:23 PM 2/12/02 -0800, you wrote:
> > From: Dan Finkelstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > Thanks for your approach.  I guess there a various ways to structure
> > this.  I was trying to avoid having two template pages and two
>controllers
> > for each report.  That seemed like too much.  Your solution is nice
> > because
> > you end up with a total of two controllers, and then two template
>pages
> > for
> > each report.
>
>Yup, lots of ways to skin cats :-)
>
> > What I ended up doing was putting both the query template page and the
> > report template page together in a single template page doing
>something
> > like this:
> >
> >          <html>....
> >          #if ($form)
> >                  html for form goes here
> >          #else
> >                  html for report goes here
> >          #end
> >          ...</html>
> >
> > And then in the controller is something like this:
> >          boolean getForm() { return
> > getRequest().getMethod().equals("GET"); }
> >
> > The controller also ends up serving "double-duty", handling the query
>and
> > the report.  I like it because it tends to keep like functionality
> > together.
>
>Just looking at what you have here, why not put the html for the two
>separate views in different files and then let the controller choose
>between them?  The maverick.xml could be something like this:
>
><command name="report">
>   <controller class="org.foo.Bar"/>
>   <view name="form" path="form.vm"/>
>   <view name="report" path="report.vm"/>
>   <view name="other" ...
></command>
>
>I tend to shy away from big #if statements in my templates, but of
>course everyone is entitled their own aesthetic judgment :-)  I also
>tend to prefer breaking functionality out into separate classes, sharing
>common behavior in a superclass.
>
> > By the by, I _really_ am enjoying this framework.  It truly is
> > well-designed and thought through -- it is a pleasure to use.  I've
>worked
> > with and seen many frameworks and this is the first one I've seen that
> > really makes sense.  (...even without documentation!!!)
>
>Thanks!!!  We love hearing stuff like this :-)
>
>Jeff Schnitzer
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mav-user mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user


_______________________________________________
Mav-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mav-user

Reply via email to