I prefer not to get into this conversation... maybe someone else wants to? ;-))

<onlyMeansSomethingToScott>
"carefull or I'll sew you"
</onlyMeansSomethingToScott>

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 10:14 AM
To: CFAussie Mailing List
Subject: [cfaussie] Re: the big oo train, on the right track?


> you have it your way, i'll have it my way...
>
> Maybe fun was not the right word to use, but I'm sure you understood the underlying 
> meaning of it.
>

So if a UI framework were to be given as a default, with skinning
capabilities? you'd not use it? instead roll your own. If so Why?

Scott


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 10:03 AM
> To: CFAussie Mailing List
> Subject: [cfaussie] Re: the big oo train, on the right track?
>
>
>
> Taco Fleur wrote:
>
>
>
>>Scott, how would we make any money if we have an application that does all this for 
>>us already? Where would the fun be, trying to discover a new process of doing things 
>>better?
>
>
> Heh. Where would be the fun? how about i explain that to management why
>
> a project is taking so long, because "I wanted to have fun".
>
> Get a UI up in front of a client/management and you can have all the fun
>
> you want in the world. Besides, products like FLEX are actually fun to
>
> use, you can do exactly more so in FLEX then you can in HTML.
>
>
> Its like saying:
>
> "i'd rather not use windows xp user interface as its not as fun as
>
> typing long winded commands in a unix blackscreen"
>
> Enter LongHorn - XAML is the answer to the same question above, we need
>
> a XML approach to Client-Development.
>
>
> You just dont want the framework built in because you never wrote it :)
>
> .. i too dislike off the shelf frameworks, but hey at this point, i'll
>
> give my left nut for one. Not only that, its typically redundent
>
> process, you only need dynamic UI for "websites" for applications, its
>
> more on the principal logic behind the scenes and less on the UI (UI is
>
> more just Win Forms etc).
>
> Don't get me started man ;D
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>I hope Flex or any other framework is never included with CF server.
>>
>
>
>>mi 2 pesetas
>>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 9:16 AM
>>To: CFAussie Mailing List
>>Subject: [cfaussie] Re: the big oo train, on the right track?
>>
>
>
>
>>XML is ok.
>>
>
>
>>Half the time i feel like we as CFMX developers are making up our own
>>
>
>
>>language? doesn't that strike anyone else as an odd thing to do? In that
>>
>
>
>>  it seems to be a common ask:
>>
>
>
>>"Use XML to build UI"
>>
>
>
>>Whether it be using Custom tags with your own namespace, pure XML or
>>
>
>
>>products like FLEX (which isn't exactly an easy thing to get in the
>>
>
>
>>door, price wise).
>>
>
>
>>BlackStone is supposed to solve some problems by giving you a reduced
>>
>
>
>>version of blackstone and achieve the above request in a hybrid way.
>>
>
>
>>More to the point, its a big ask, and its really not that hard to
>>
>
>
>>accomplish (we have done so much in so little time using CFIMPORT, CFC
>>
>
>
>>and DHTML). Granted its DHTML, but the UI is going to be done a lot faster.
>>
>
>
>>Point is, surely we aren't the only ones to do this and why the hell
>>
>
>
>>doesn't someone at MM get off their ass and put that feature into CFMX,
>>
>
>
>>and watch the sales go higher.
>>
>
>
>>Or why not combine FLEX & CFMX. FFS tired of this bullshit, where most
>>
>
>
>>of our OOP is done UI side rather then CFMX Model end.
>>
>
>
>>Scott
>>P.S
>>Sorry for hijacking the thread.
>>
>
>
>
>
>>Taco Fleur wrote:
>>
>
>
>
>>>This is how I currently do it in several places.
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>have one XML file containing general objects like;
>>>- firstName
>>>- lastName
>>>- dateOfBirth
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>and define the set properties for these objects, i.e. maximumLength, minimumLength, 
>>>range etc. and then use these for all applications.
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>Then I have a XML file in each application that references to those objects and 
>>>puts them in a form, example;
>>>
>>
>
>
>>><form name="frmSignUp">
>>>     <object name="firstName"><required>true</required></object>
>>>     <object name="dateOfBirth"><required>true</required></object>
>>></form>
>>>
>
>>><form name="frmEmployee">
>>>     <object name="dateOfBirth"><required>true</required></object>
>>></form>
>>>
>
>>>with this info you can create client side validation and server side, there is bit 
>>>more to it then what I mentioned above, but thats the basic idea behind it.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>>Is it o.k to make a cfc create the form element for you?
>>>
>
>
>>>I can't see a reason why not? Thats a little experiment I worked on a couple of 
>>>weeks ago, I used the getMetaData(object) function to see what the cfc expects and 
>>>then create the form and data validation, which is another cool way of doing it, 
>>>but Sean Corfield suggested that its better to stick with the XML files, haven't 
>>>decided yet myself, maybe a combination of both, for example, let the CFCs dictate 
>>>stuff like; required (true/false) extra error checking etc.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Gareth Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 8:16 AM
>>>To: CFAussie Mailing List
>>>Subject: [cfaussie] RE: the big oo train, on the right track?
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>We are currently going down the track of building custom tag library's
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>Is it o.k to make a cfc create the form element for you?
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>Would the xml file contain data such as status bar information and clientside 
>>>validation?
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>Gareth.
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Jamie Lawrence Jenner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, 28 July 2004 10:26 PM
>>>To: CFAussie Mailing List
>>>Subject: [cfaussie] RE: the big oo train, on the right track?
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>taco said
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>>Centralized data validation is certainly a good idea, but I would store the
>>>>meta data for the fields in a XML file instead of defining it by a prefix.
>>>
>
>
>>>the validation obj will be accessible by all forms across many sites.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>So do you mean that each form from each site should also pass an xml
>>>string detailing which field needs what validation? If not, what do you
>>>mean exactly?
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>if i can do without the prefix it will make my life easier
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>>I don't think all your objects should go into one CFC, the error.cfc
>>>
>
>>>should
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>>handle all errors and not just those for your form, so that should be a
>>>
>
>>>CFC
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>>on its own IMHO
>>>
>
>
>>>It will, but ive only just started out! I am hoping to have a global error
>>>object, form object, validation object, and ive also thought about doing a
>>>global DAO. any others i could implement? your views
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>greg said
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>>My understanding is that there is still some way to go
>>>>before you could even start considering cfml an OO language
>>>
>
>
>
>>>oh yes, i agree, but i thought that there may have been more emphasis on
>>>teaching the benefits of oop and what can be done in cf so far (thus i
>>>could have concentrated on these methods from the start). joined the
>>>various lists you suggested, tuned brain to sponge mode and off i go!
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>cheers for the info guys
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>jamo
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>---
>>>You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>---
>>>You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
>>>
>>
>
>
>>>Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in 
>>>Townsville, North Queensland 4-7 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>---
>>You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
>>
>
>
>>Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in 
>>Townsville, North Queensland 4-7 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
>
> Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in 
> Townsville, North Queensland 4-7 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf
>
>

---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/

Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in 
Townsville, North Queensland 4-7 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf

---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/

Reply via email to