I've taken my first crack at this and its undergoing review before I post it. I dislike both actions and the flowmap. More specifically principally depending on Javascript.
-Andy Christian Haul wrote: > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > >> >> Per-Olof Norén wrote: >> >>> Ivelin Ivanov wrote: >>> >>>> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: >>>> >>>>>> IMNSHO, the flowmap should totally replace actions and deprecate >>>>>> them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ahem, I thought we decided *not* to deprecate them, as they make >>>>> sense as elements in the declarative sitemap. >>>>> >>>>> For web apps Actions should be *strongly* discouraged, but can >>>>> have uses in sitemap-only publishing sites. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I agree that Actions are not as natural to Cocoon sitemap as >>>> Generator, Transformers and Serializers are. What is the right >>>> replacement for them which will glue front end with the business >>>> logic layer. >>>> Are you saying that the flowmap will call Java code directly? >>>> Would you need to write gluing JavaScript even for simple one page >>>> input handling? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> My interpretation would be that if that input handling is needed it >>> should be done in the flowmap. >> >> >> >> I agree. >> >>> If there is a need for an action, one should use flow. >> >> >> >> Actions are not only for input handling. >> >>> Personally I tend to hesitate to write an action and if a actually >>> do it i tend to "overwork" it, costing lots of unneccecary hours to >>> the project at hand. Therefore i agree with Stefano on his quest for >>> an action-free cocoon, given that it is expanded from its current >>> form of course :) >> >> >> >> :-) >> >> If I want to log every request to my custom system, I could make an >> action that does it and it would be simple. >> Do I have to write a one-line flowmap for it? >> Dunno, maybe it could be ok, maybe not... >> >> ...I think that this decision (of deprecating Actions) will have to >> be taken when the flow is really working well; ATM we don't have >> enough elements to discuss it correctly. > > > While the flow script is a cool thing, no one is going to code > everything in java script. Especially not complex things. Database > operations are an example. > > So, put them into an avalon component. Great. But doing all the look > up manually in javascript is tiresome. Uh, could we come up with a > simplification? But then we would need a common interface for it, yes, > that's it! > > But wait - we do have that already! It's called "Action". Just that we > currently can't use it in flow script. > > Wouldn't it be cool if we could use an action in the sitemap as well > as in a flow script? There are currently about 50 actions available in > C2. > Wouldn't that boost flow script? > > Just my 2˘ > > Chris. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
