On Sunday, June 23, 2002, at 12:25 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
<snip /> > So what use cases do we have? > > * It should definitely be easy to write wizards in a flow description > language. > I believe this is the case for flowscripts (see > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=102052662705449&w=2, > for > details), but on the other hand this could be done in a much smaller and > more specialized language. Ivelin and Torsten listed some requirements > for > wizards, IIRC. > > * Shopping carts? This will be possible when Ovidiu (or someone else) > have > added variables that are accessible across different flowscript > invocations. > > * Anything more? I'm trying to imagine what it would be like to use the same sitemap (view) and same content (model) with different flowscripts. Here's some *very* preliminary thoughts on how I might apply flowscripts to a real world need (based on an even more preliminary understanding of what might be possible). Use Case Idea 1 what: games, simulations, decision support webapps model: e.g., simulation model of an ecosystem - view: sitemap pipelines, presenting useful views of ecosystem (status, history, impacts, etc.) - controller: flowscripts - flowscript variations -> different webapps (a) single-user simulation game (users interact with model over a period of time) (b) multi-user game, similar to (a) but different players (characters with different roles) had different flow scripts (c) simulation tool (not a game) which shows results of policies over time (d) decision support tool with feedback about policy decisions (flowscripts could be even be granularized based a a field of concern, e.g. a farmer may want different advice than a logger) ... Note: I know you're probably thinking, these all could use different views (sitemaps) as well. While this may be true, in my experience, there is a lot of "view overlap" among these seemingly different applications. Use Case Idea 2: what: learning tools model: learning content view: document pages, quiz pages, feedback pages, report pages, etc. controller: flowscripts -> same tools, different audiences and users with varying learning levels (a) basic, intermediate, advanced flowscripts (or grade-level, professional concern) for different levels of ability (Some learners need reinforcement when they struggle with concepts, other don't.) This could be dynamically generated, of course. (b) different flowscripts based on context of use (how much time available, professional needs, etc.) (c) different flowscripts (for future continuations) generated dynamically (or by a teacher, e.g.) based on a student's past performance. On the other hand, once you have a great set of flowscripts, you could use them with different sitemaps and different models as well. With SoC, the possibilities seems almost unlimited for extremely valuable reuse. Is this overkill for a flowscript? Diana --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
