> So why is it Controllers that we build our applications to > (by extending one of the four Controller implementing classes > like FormBeanUser) yet it is Commands that get created by the > Dispatcher?
Let's look at it: 1. Browser requests an URL (eg. http://localhost/test.m) 2. In maveric terminology it appears that test.m is actually mapped to a "test" command. 3. Maverick dispatches the request to appropriate Controller that takes care of command execution. Controller also takes care of the flow (eg. returns a view or executes another command). Any controller can serve multiple commands. So commands are just placeholders for specific URLs. And another way around: Command fires a controller. If your application has separate controller for each command, then at least I allow you to say that command is a controller or that controller wraps a command (and takes care of it's execution). Maverick only dispatches, you have the control! ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php [INVALID FOOTER]
