Op 11-12-2012 21:59, Alan Alpert schreef: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Shawn Rutledge > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:48:22AM -0800, Alan Alpert wrote: >>> Why can't this be QML-only? For the set of controls exposed in >>> C++-only we have a C++-only Action API. When we add a set of controls >>> exposed in QML-only we can have a QML-only Action API. We don't >> Because it seems likely that the business logic of an application would >> be written in C++, so why not export the actions that the logic can >> support at the same time? > The way I see it, the actions are UI logic, not business logic, and > belong on the QML side of the divide (although they are right on the > edge). I disagree here. The core of the action - the abstraction of the action method itself and its availability in the current state - is business logic IMO. The same goes for any value the action may have: checked, or perhaps some other value. The action logically bundles state (the availability of an action) with the action itself.
The decoration around it - the user visible strings, icons and whatnot - is indeed UI logic. That's why I think that perhaps we conceptually need something like a CoreAction and a UiAction. The UiAction would 'decorate' a CoreAction with the stuff that is needed to represent it in a UI. The implementation of the UiAction part would be different for QML and Widgets, I think. Actions are a very powerful piece of glue between business and UI logic if used this way. André _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
