On Jan 24, 2005, at 5:46 PM, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Glen Ezkovich wrote:On Jan 23, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:First I think that CForms is great in many ways and does an excelent job. But IMO its architecture is a severe mixture of concerns and rather monolitic. There is no clear separation between model, view and control. IMO it should never have emited any SAX events at all. Producing XML is a concern for the view layer e.g. a set of JXTG macros.
Here, replace jxtg with FormsTransformer.
If it had been a "passive" model it would have been much easier to write the JXTG macros and no hacks would have been required.Since CForms is an integral part of Cocoon, maybe it is time to handle them directly in JXTG and not with macros. I don't know.
Don't think it is a good idea. CForms might be really nice, but still it just another external to the Cocoon Core block. Jxtg, OTOH, is part of the Core.
I don't know. I'll take your word. But I would think form handling would be a core concern.
Core should not be dependent on each and every block out there.
No it shouldn't. It should have no dependencies outside of its block.
Additionally, CForms has nice FormsTransformer the only downside of which is that it is too monolithic, and has couple of limitations. A bit of refactoring and an expression language from refactored jxtg is all it needs, imho.
hmmm... If people are currently using macros in JXTG and avoiding the FormsTransformer, why would we take an expression language from JXTG and use it in the FormsTransformer? So we wouldn't need JXTG? Both have their place. I have not yet deployed an application using CForms but with the way I do things, I would use both in the same pipeline.
Glen Ezkovich HardBop Consulting glen at hard-bop.com http://www.hard-bop.com
A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
