> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Michiel Meeuwissen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Verzonden: woensdag 10 maart 2004 12:06 > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Onderwerp: Re: locale sensitive tags > > > Ernst Bunders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > > Van: Michiel Meeuwissen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Verzonden: maandag 8 maart 2004 16:31 > > > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Onderwerp: Re: locale sensitive tags > > > > > > > > > Kees Jongenburger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Do we wans soms sort of grouping or a "case" tag? > > > > > > Perhaps yes. Something like xslt's xsl:choose xsl:when > > > xsl:otherwise was > > > considered during the taglib-meeting (I would perhaps propose > > > the excact > > > same tag-names) > > > > I suppose it is not possible for mmbase tags to use the > same context for > > storing values as the standard taglib (or other taglibs) > use? that way you > > could chunk all the non-mmbase tags and use jstl and other taglibs > > alongside. that would take care of the maintainance issue. > > Yes, I've looked into this matter once (though not very > deeply). It would be > a bit hard, especially because mmbase taglib's attribute are > quite powerful. > > It might be worth investigating this further, to at least > make cooperation > between mmbase- and other taglib possible in some extend.
it probably would be a lot of effort for arbitrairy benefit. The mmbase taglib is powerfull indeed, but i predict that the more powerfull it gets, the more people start expecting from it, and perhaps development and maintainance effort could increase exponentially. You allso have to ask yourselfe if you want to redevelope al kinds of things that ar allready there. > > > Node.getFieldsValues() > > if this returns a map than with fieldnames as key and > > getStringValue([fieldname]) as value, the Node could be > used with jstl or > > other taglibs conforming to this standard. > > This way the taglib could be small and easily maintainable > and yet the total > > sum of functionality would increase a lot. > > > > > > I allso think this is important becouse more and more > people start building > > their webapps/sites according to the jsp2 specs > (struts/tiles), where all > > the buissiness logic and data gathering will be seperated > form de data > > presentation and data will be placed in the PageContext > before parsing. At > > this moment nor the mmbase taglib nor the jstl can be used > to build jsp > > templates in such an approach. > > I'm not even sure I like the approach, because it seems to > lay yet another > layer in the absurdly thick stack of layers you'd normally > have already.. > I partly disagree with you. Mmbase is primarily sutable for building websites. In websites most of the logic involved is presentation logic. This is usually light and (more important) dous not extend beyond the context of the view (jsp) that is incuded in. Allso the data is not very dynamic, and caching requrements are general. Many websites created with mmbase are (partly) webapps, with different characteristics. First the data is often more dynamic and for instance mmbase caching dous not perform very wel with it. second there is a different logic, application logic or business rules. This kind of logic does often not logically belong in a single view, but will drive different views in stead. Here the mmbase taglib (or any taglib) is not the right choice. Even if you manage to build more complex logic with tags it yields unclear code that is hard to read and maintain. Therefor it needs to be positioned differently. A good reason to take the data-gathering could be that mmbase is used alongside other data systems (which is in turn more likely becouse very dynamic systems don't perform well with mmbase). Here you maybe want some data from a cloud, and some other data (perhaps wrapped in beans or collections) that you pass on to the jsp. Then you would like a uniform way to access this data. at the moment this is not easy, becouse the mmbase tags don't allow you to interact with the pageContext (probably easily worked around with some kind of mm:import flavour), and other taglibs (jst, especially created for this purpose) can not work with mmbase node objects. conclusion: i think it is too mmbase-centric to think that the current taglib approach is sufficient in every way. I see allready a lot of situations happening that i described above. Could this be an issue for the mmbase roadmap project? Ernst > E.g. in my viewpoint (x)html is already an abstract > representation of data > and for style there is css. It is of course a probrem that > HTML is no good > (and more importantly: badly supported by browsers, extremely > so by some) > but I'd prefer to learn to live with that, rather then > creating yet another > abstraction layer, to work around it. > > But anyhow, yes, if people want to do it, it would be nice if > it would be > possible, but since I have virtually no experience it it, I > would not dare > to propose a way in how we would make it possible... > > > Michiel > > > > -- > Michiel Meeuwissen > Mediapark C101 Hilversum > +31 (0)35 6772979 > nl_NL eo_XX en_US > mihxil' > [] () >
