Good point. Lately we started to put more complex objects into the model locator. But as soon as you do this, you want to call their methods from the view directly and also encapsulate some of the cairngorm event dispatching in there. It doesn't really feel cairngorm. Therefore i'm also interested in other solutions.
Cheers, Ralf. On 12/2/06, Lachlan Cotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Something that troubles me about the Cairngorm architecture is the > apparent lack of any proper domain model. Although it is argued that > the domain model actually exists on the server and that the Flex > client is essentially a view, I have always found it necessary to > construct some kind of object graph of the domain on the client as well. > > I have two concerns regarding this. > > First, I have never seen examples or discussion of Cairngorm that > deals with this issue. In most cases the 'model' isn't much more than > a collection of dumb value objects without complex relationships. > > Second, and more importantly, pretty much all the logic of Cairngorm > apps seems to reside in the Command and Delegate classes with not > much to speak about in the actual model. It seems to be the Commands > that end up manipulating the application data directly, and I'm a > little uncomfortable with this. > > I think Cairngorm's a good method for managing code and iterative > development, but I'm not sure about how well it does encapsulation > and MVC. > > Anyone care to discuss? > > Cheers, > Lach > > > -- > Flexcoders Mailing List > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Ralf Bokelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Flex & Flash Consultant based in Cologne/Germany
