On 4/4/07, Carl Karsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ed Leafe wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:57 AM, Carl Karsten wrote:
> >
> >> I both agree and disagree with the current replies :)
> >>
> >> to use dabo's Biz objects, you need a data object to talk to that
> >> conforms to
> >> dabos Data tier api.  you 'can' create such a thing, but it may be
> >> be quite a
> >> bit of work.  (and assuming that the dabo tiers are well separated,
> >> which I
> >> think they are)
> >
> >       One of the reasons I wrote the Bubblet demo was to show how to use
> > bizobjs without a database; they are simply rule repositories. There
> > is no need to use the data tier with bizobjs.
> >
> >       In this case, there is a semblance of a data tier,
>

I see a data tier, not a semblance.  The data tier doesn't have to
retrieve data from a database, as long as it conforms to the API
standards of the layer.

> Why semblance?
>
> > but not an dbapi-
> > type one. So the communication with the "data tier" will have to be
> > coded, but the advantage of separating logic from presentation can
> > still be achieved.
>
> Does the data tier have to be an dbapi-type one for the dabo biz objects to
> interact with?

Maybe we need to document the layer API?  That way then the data
backend shouldn't matter.

>
> I would not expect to have to change any BO code, just write a ton of data
> handling code.  actually, it is read only, so only about a quarter ton.
>
> Carl K
>
> _______________________________________________
> Post Messages to: [email protected]
> Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
> Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
> This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to