I have used FarCry containers/rules/etc. to access foreign content that is not in FarCry and is not FarCry-COAPI-based. You just need to create a rule and get it to return the data in a format that the container rendering can use.
Two Examples: * a rule that obtains XML packets from a known source via a web-service-like call (according to specs stored in the rule object) and then delivers that for a container to render * a FarCry includeObj that gets data from a stock pricing system, renders graph details (in this case the appropriate calls to PopCharts) into a string and gives that to the container to render Yes, the RULE must be built in COAPI so that the CONTAINER can use it - and you MUST deliver the information so that the CONTAINER can render it (either as further object invocations or as string data) - but it all works. There is no need to much around with the core to get it to work though. That doesn't mean you can just "run" a Mach-II app in FarCry - but if the business level objects have been designed correctly, you just create a facade and call them from the FarCry framework - then design appropriate FarCry rendering code. Regards, Gary Menzel On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:27:35 -0500, Jeff Coughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Rittler wrote: > > if any of you have applications of any size that you integrated into > > Farcry that go beyond a simple includedObj, how did you do it? > > Steve, > > One way I've been integrating data from one system into Farcry was to > make a reference table (similar to an array table that FourQ would use) > and have it reference the identity field in my data table. (I'm > technically not done working on this project). > > When I create new data in my old app I have it call up a script that > udpates the reference table in my farcry DB (thus it creates an objectID > in farcry (I believe I used createData(), can't recall atm) and in the > same table the script places the unique ID I use in the other system). > > This does two things for me: > > 1) It leaves my old app to run as a separate program using the code the > way I want it to stay (Mach-II, Fusebox, whatever). The old app has no > clue that Farcry is using its data, and I am always free to pull Farcry > out of the equation. > > 2) Now Farcry thinks the data is a Farcry object, thus I can treat it as > such and do what I like with it (inlcuding searches, containers, etc). > > With this example you can see how keeping these applications separate > can sometimes be benefitial. In my case I am just using two separate > DBs in MSSQL, however you could have the data running on two different > systems and have the data transferred in other methods (ie. web services). > > As much as I'd like to taqke full credit on this I have to give a little > credit to Spike Milligan for the initial idea from a discussion we had a > few weeks back. He probably doesn't even remember, but I don't have the > heart to steal other's ideas without giving them credit :). > > -Jeff C. > > --- > 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/ > --- 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/
