Leszek Gawron wrote:
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Leszek Gawron wrote:
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
oceatoon wrote:
This is wishfull thinking and probably no news to those refactoring
JX. But
access to the session context object like the session-context input
module
would be great (like for example with the authentication context).
I have
found other post asking about and for this sort of functionality.
it would
smoothen quite a bit the access to such inportant elements as the
ones in
session-context (like authentication data).
Yes, this should be possible, I agree. I hope that the refactored
version will be pluggable to plug-in some kind of adapter to access
"own data" like the authentication context etc.
Wouldn't it be better if JXTG supported input modules with syntax like:
{im:moduleName:valueName}
?
Don't know :) Sure, this is one solution - my idea is a little bit
different:
we could provide a pluggable object model and then use this object
model in jxtg,
but also in input modules - so in fact you would only need one input
module and can use the same syntax there as in jxtg. I'm not sure if
this makes sense, but if it does, we wouldn't need input modules anymore.
Carsten
don't we have a pluggable object model ? :))
function doIt() {
var objectModel = {};
objectModel.pluggedIn1 = entityFromDatabase();
objectModel.pluggedIn2 = request.getParameter( "skin" );
cocoon.sendPage( "view/myview.jx", objectModel );
}
Other data that is not directly available from flow (like authentication
context can be accessed with input modules that are already available).
something like this in flow would be useful:
function doIt() {
var objectModel = {
skin: cocoon.inputModule.defaults.getValue( "skin" )};
cocoon.sendPage( "view/myview.jx", objectModel );
that would require FOM to be extended. WDYT?
--
Leszek Gawron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project Manager MobileBox sp. z o.o.
+48 (61) 855 06 67 http://www.mobilebox.pl
mobile: +48 (501) 720 812 fax: +48 (61) 853 29 65
