>
> exactly... look a bit closer though. this action has a special name called
> "introspection" and is only called once - at the start of the flow :)
Not that it's all that important at this stage, but
shlould we try to use more popular words for naming the classes and the
functions.
Names that sound familiar and can be associated with corresponding names in
other popular technologies or design patterns.
This usually flattens the learning curve and lowers the acceptance barrier.
So names like bind/populate over introspection, and Validator vs Preceptor.
<snip-things-I-like/>
> > > populate(objectModel, "feedbackform",
"cocoon-installation/user/*");
> > >
> > > List errors = validate(objectModel, "feedbackform",
> > "cocoon-installation/user/*");
Can you explain a bit more why the 2rd argument is XPath.
Wouldn't it be more natural to make a call like:
Validator v = new SchematronValidator( "mysche-report.xml");
ValidationResult vr = v.validate(myJavaBean); // or v.validate(myDomNode);
if(vr.errors != null) { ...
> > > getLogger().debug("there are errors on the page");
> > > return (page(FIRST));
> > > }
> > > else {
> > > getLogger().debug("all constraints are ok");
> > > return (page(SECOND));
I like the return idea simliar to Struts (again, I know). An action should
be a pure controller, no View logic in it.
> > Oh boy, this is good. Let me think a bit on how to Implement the
Preceptor
> > for Schematron.
> > Do you have one for Relax-NG working?
>
> Well, currently it's not conformant yet but - yes, I have...
Maybe if I look at the code, I can come up with one for Schematron.
> > Jeremy, do you think both methods can be merged somehow?
>
> Maybe Jeremy is right - they are different approaches and maybe we should
> give it some time to see the real benefits of both techniques before
> mixing the concepts... don't know...
Some time is fine. But lets not allow it to take another 12 months before
someone resurrects the vampire 8>
> > If for example the BO bean becomes part of a document on the pipeline
(like
> > they usually do),
> > then another XSD or Schematron that validates the bean as part of the
whole
> > document may be applied.
> > In which case both Action and Pipeline validation are needed.
>
> not necessarily with my concept...
Your concept handles the input, its the Controller (I assume we all agree
that MVC is good), where as the BO becomes part of a bigger document during
the View process, which is outside of the Controller scope. See my example
with the feedback wizard in the other email. Makes sence?
> > Sorry to repeat myself, but would you mind submitting the feedback
wizard
> > requirements which you were thinking about.
>
> I did already....
I think I haven't received it yet.
Cheers,
Ivelin
>
> > It maybe easier if we have a point of reference for our discussion.
>
> sure
> --
> Torsten
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
