This doesn't sound like a bad idea. I'll pass it onto the issue database as an enhancement.

-- geoff
http://www.daemon.com.au/

Gary Menzel wrote:
Maybe it was my mistake - it was more of a "wish list" than a reality.

The concept would be to be able to pass arguments to the
<con:container> tag as you mentioned.  Then, when the container
instaniates each rule it would pass over it's attribute collection
(arguments are the collection for methods) to the rule in some way
(preferably when the rule object was initialised).  Then all those
arguments would be available to each rule.  Then you could pick and
choose what arguments you want.

But - for now - you have to stick them in the Request scope (as far as I know).

Gary



On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:56:00 +0800, Andrew Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi Gary,

I have read this a few times now and am still not sure how this would
tie in with the containers and rules - or are you sugesting of
bypassing those contraints and having an object that calls the rule
directly (passing whatever you like)?


On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:47:32 +1000, Gary Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Then - decouple.

Have an object instatiated somewhere - maybe in request scope - (it'd
be nice if you could pass one over as a parameter to the container
which in turn could pass that over to the rule) and just call that
object globally to get the data you want.

Then - initialise that object with the "struct" (quite probably FORM)
that you want the data to come from - or better still by calling
methods that initialise the data internally.

Then you are only coupled to the object (because you can't pass it to
the container).  You can switch in a different object if you like, and
then your Rule wont know the difference.

To fully de-couple things in FarCry it would require a significant
redesigned of may of the tags, components and methods.

And - to answer Tim's question about "publishing rule".....

"Content is Content".  And sometimes a form is content.  I personally
dont distinguish the difference between outputing "text" or an "image"
from outputting a "form".

Regards,
Gary


On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:28:21 +1100, Tim Lucas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 12/01/2005, at 2:12 PM, Andrew Mercer wrote:

the page has a form with a publish date which is used in the rule to
find items published on that date

I was talking a more general case of using a publishing rule for form processing.

For your case it probably doesn't make any difference. Coupling it to
the form scope isn't a big deal unless you see it being used w/o the
form submission.

- tim

--- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/

Reply via email to