On Thu, 2003-04-03 at 14:28, Jeremy Quinn wrote: [...] > An ideal forms framework is complicated by the fact that people need to > do very different things .... > > Here are examples of two obvious uses, and how they can differ: > > Editing 'business' data > > 'forms' contain simple data types that need validating as data-types > often require JavaBean etc. object mapping with business logic > often require RDBMS etc. mapping for persistence > > Editing XML Content > > 'forms' contain a mixture of simple data types and markup > often need wysiwyg editing for the markup > might need to transform form data from one MU language to another > need to validate XML fragments > need to roundtrip XML fragments between editor and server > need to modify XML 'documents' on the server
And a third one: not editing anything at all, but just gathering parameters to call some service. > IMHO, it is the differences between these typical needs, that is > causing some of the misunderstandings between people who are currently > discussing form frameworks. > The way I see things, providing a form for modifying an XML document is not different from one for modifying a database record or an entity bean. During initialisation, load the form with data from the XML document, and once the submit-until-everything's-valid cycle is over, apply the changes back to the XML document. -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
