Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Ugo Cei wrote:
Looks good to me. AFAIK, Ajax support works only with the template
macros, so it might not make sense to add this feature to the
transformer also. What is the orientation of the community towards the
transformer/macros ambiguity? I'd like to have just one recommended
implementation of this, so if macros are the way to go, what about
deprecating the forms transformer?
Well, macros are more powerful because they allow to do more than
templating with the widgets. A straightforward example is conditional
templating, e.g. displaying "There are now contacts" rather than an
empty table. This is not possible with a transformer, unless we add an
expression language and some control structures which will make it yet
another programming-language-in-XML...
OTOH, the transformer is useful when JXTG is not a option e.g. when the
generator is an XSP...
IIUC you can also use JX as a transformer, so wouldn't that cover this case?
Anyway... to Ugo's question, I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that
AJAX works regardless of whether the template is interpreted by JX or
the FormsTemplateTransformer, since it's the widgets themselves that
signal whether or not they have been updated by wrapping their SAX
output in a <bu:replace>.
Personally I usually use FormsTemplateTransformer for most forms, unless
I know for sure I'm going to need the extra expressive power of JX.
Mostly because I'm too lazy to jx:import the forms macros resource in
every template.
--Jason
