Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Shared neurons again : re-thinking to my previous post, I realized exactly what you say. The various model extensions needed by each layer need to be physically separated (different people, different files), but must be assembled into a single runtime model.
So actually, what we need is a way for people to organise this global model into various files that correspond to their team organisation, so that they don't step on each other's toes. Hence the need for different separations depending on the context.
Just to be sure:
By various files you also mean pipelines, which can dynamically produce the needed data?
This would allow many extensions without hacking into woody itself! See authentication framework and portal framework, where many parts are produced by pipelines.
Dynamic form definitions are a way to handle more complicated case, and could even be used to handle the results of this long threads without touching a single line of the current Woody.
But what we want with the proposed refactoring, is avoid the need for dynamic form definitions for the most frequent use cases. But this possibility will still be available for specific use cases.
Sylvain
-- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects } Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
