On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:34:22AM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Well, time for a bit of rant on this.But isn't this our design approach? If I remember correctly our FOM discussions, "less is more", right?Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Why is there a need to have a different API for widgets when used from JS than when used from Java? IMO, this is arbitrarily limiting the features available in flowscript.
I'm personally not that happy with "less is more" as it was applied to FOM. Although I agree that bloated APIs should be avoided, restricting the Cocoon core APIs (the environment) in some specific area of Cocoon (flowscript) seems to me an arbitrary constraint.
I agree with "less is more" in designing API's, but when we have what should be *one* API exposed in two environments it should be the *same* API, modulo environment-specific ease-of-use enhancements. In short, I think everything that is public in the Java API should also be directly available in the JS API. I interpret "less is more" to mean expose-in-both or expose-in-neither, otherwise we create confusion.
+1000. That's exactly my point.
Sylvain
-- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
