El mié, 21-09-2005 a las 13:52 +0200, Felix Röthenbacher escribió: > > Michael Wechner wrote: > > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > > [...] > >> > >> I disagree. The model should be free from presentation logic. Visibility > >> is presentation logic which could be changed for certain roles or > >> workflow situation. I agree with Josias that it belongs to the view. > >> > >> > > > > I also think that it should belong to the view and not the actual > > data. There can be many different views/maps of the actual data, just > > as one has different maps in geography. > > > > So you propose to have a separate model for each view, sort of a model > of a model? It seems to me that this approach will add unnecesary > complexity which leads to poor maintainability. Every change in the > main model has to be reflected in each model of every view.
Actually no. What I know explain is coming from my development in forrest. The component (codename in forrest: forrest:views) that would be responsible for viewing the model would be configured via a xml. More the view would request the model on demand and not expect a given presentation model. > Another approach is to use per-view metadata, i.e. each > view (e.g. the sitetree) is free to add attributes to the document > (see CustomMetaData). This way, the data are kept together and the MVC > axiom can be maintained. > > WDYT? Actually that is forrest:views. ;-) salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
