On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:53:10 +0100, Pilgrim, Peter wrote:
> One more thing: Could we finally start designing to Java interfaces
> into Struts<sup>2</sup>? Ta.
>
> interface IActionRequest { ... }
> interface IActionResponse { ... }
> interface IActionForward { ... }
>
> interface IActionContext {
> IActionRequest getRequest();
> IActionResponse getResponse();
> }
>
> PS: Got a feeling some of this has been done within Commons Chains
> when I last looked at the jarbundle/.
Yes, for a longer list of "one more things", see the Jericho whiteboard :)
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsJericho
I'm a fan of Commons Chain, and I do imagine we'll see the same design patterns and
coding standard in Struts Next Generation.
And, speaking of whiteboard, see also
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons/chain/WHITEBOARD.html?view=markup
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:53:10 +0100, Pilgrim, Peter wrote:
> I think we need to define a feature common denominator table of
> what constitutes a request and response as we know they exist now.
I'm of like mind, but I'd like to take a step farther back and define a set of Struts
use case scenarios, for both this generation and the next.
> (0) Client submits request
> (1) System receives the incoming request
> (2) System transfers matching values to a form object
> (3) System
> validates the object
> (4) System branches to success or failure.
> (4a) On success, system executes/delegates the business logic.
> (4b) On failure, system returns the faulty input.
> (5) A view displays the nominal result or redisplays faulty input.
And so on.
Then we'd have a clear idea of what we are building the interfaces to do.
Of course, any contributions here would be welcome.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
