Per-Olof Nor�n wrote:
> So the the controller is defined and used as the following?
>
> <map:controller language="JavaScript">
> <map:script src="prefs.js"/>
> <map:script src="some-other-script.js"/>
> </map:controller>
> ....
> <map:match pattern="calc/*">
> <map:flow function="calculator" continuation="{1}"/>
> </map:match>
>
> +1 on that. Seems to me the overall usage will be the same.
Call me picky, but I have a few issues with the above.
1) <map:controller> is clearly MVC-oriented. I find this incoherent with
the rest of the sitemap semantics. It is true that 'flow' takes the role
of a 'controller' if we apply the MVC pattern on top of cocoon, but I
*do*not* think we should marry the MVC pattern that close. Expecially
because there is no explicit indication of the rest of the pattern's
concerns (what is a view in Cocoon? that's not an easy answer)
My point is: Cocoon is a framework and uses separation of concerns as
the main metapattern. Why should we restrict our semantics to only *one*
of the possible ways of separating concerns (that is: MVC)? Expecially
when people want to differentiate and call MVC++ or Model2 or Model2+1
or stuff like that.
My perception is that MVC is a suggestion on how to start, not the end
of the path. Flow is a much more abstract concept than 'controller' and
is more coherent with the rest of the sitemap semantics.
My proposal is to change
<map:controller language="JavaScript">
<map:script src="prefs.js"/>
<map:script src="some-other-script.js"/>
</map:controller>
with
<map:flow language="JavaScript">
<map:script src="prefs.js"/>
<map:script src="some-other-script.js"/>
</map:flow>
2) This means that we have to come up with something different to
replace <map:flow> inside the pipelines and acts as the connection
between the pipelines and the flow.
<map:match pattern="calc/*">
<map:??? function="calculator" continuation="{1}"/>
</map:match>
Here there is something to note:
a) the tags inside the pipelines indicate an action (generate,
transform, serialize, match, select, act, read). The question becomes:
what action is the above unknown tag performs?
Verbosely, the above line is 'passing control to the flow layer'.
Unfortunately, something like
<map:match pattern="calc/*">
<map:control function="calculator" continuation="{1}"/>
</map:match>
would not make the action so self-evident (and will conflict with the
'controller' semi-pattern again)
"flow" is useless if used as an action. I would be -1 on its use in this
context.
"call" might be one of the best choices:
<map:match pattern="calc/*">
<map:call function="calculator" continuation="{1}"/>
</map:match>
which is still much different from
<map:match pattern="calc/*">
<map:call resource="blah"/>
</map:match>
"delegate-to" is meaningful but it clearly sucks.
Hmmm, anybody with a better alternative?
--
Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
