I think this is an excellent idea. I also think Stripes has done an
excellent job of implementing this and allowing easy overriding with
Java code (for extensions and such).

Matt

On 10/17/07, Tom Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First of all, I think Ted did a good job of getting a start on this.
> His proposal is a great start that would unify several misc things
> that really needed to be unified.  (Especially for 2.1.x where it
> would be nice to have a unified approach to these things)
>
> Secondly, our company does the exact same thing that Brian's in that
> we have standardized components and I would love to have an open
> source standard to use.  However, is that part of what Ted created, or
> is this a separate proposal?  I really like the idea of having one
> place for xml configuration, whether it be struts config overrides,
> JPA class definitions or what-not, but that seems like a separate
> issue from what Ted is proposing.
> Tom
>
> On 10/17/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Looks good. I like the name and most of the concepts. Here's some
> > additional thoughts:
> >
> > 1. If no code component exists and a default is not available, the code
> > invocation can be completely by-passed and processing should proceed
> > with the view component handling. The caveat here is that this will
> > require adding a goal to support for messaging, localization and i18n,
> > since this is something that is currently cumbersome.
> >
> > Also, the default handling should be spelled out with Index actions and
> > all the URL nuances like trailing slashes and such.
> >
> > 1.1 I'd like to add in a componentization goal here. SmartURLs and
> > Vertigo are leveraging a file named META-INF/component.xml (inside JAR
> > files) to specify not only all the action packages and the result
> > locations for actions and views bundled inside JAR files, but also to
> > specify JPA domain classes and other configuration for the component.
> > This is HUGE for companies that like to build components and then just
> > drop them in to web applications. We have a number of these including
> > user admin, CMS, blogs, news, todo, etc. I think that expanding this
> > into the specification will help solidify that this architecture can be
> > done on Struts2 and that it is a goal of the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ted Husted wrote:
> > > Following up on suggestions made by Don and Brian, I'd like to propose
> > > that we draft a formal specification describing the logic to be used
> > > by the (deep-breath) "Able/Code Behind/Zero-Config/SmartURLs" plugin
> > > for 2.1. The purpose of the specification would be to better define
> > > what "backward compatibility" means, and also to encourage
> > > implementation of this pattern by other frameworks.
> > >
> > > Following is the beginning of an early draft of a proposed
> > > "view-behind" specification. (In case anyone is interested, I'm using
> > > the JSON-RPC specification format as a model.) If there is interest in
> > > this proposal, I'd suggest we decide whether to complete the
> > > specification as part of our documentation, or at some other location.
> > > Of course, people working with other frameworks
> > > (<cough>stripes</cough>) would be welcome to join in.
> > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


-- 
http://raibledesigns.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to