Can I throw an example out on the table where nested fusebox apps would
require two fuseactions and maybe someone can help me with all of my misery
and confusion? (We are about to implement a new development methodology
with a simplified version of fusebox as its base, and this is one of the
sticking points as I write our design standards)
This is all theoretical (yes, it can all be done a thousand ways, but its
theory, ok!), but lets say I have a web file storage circuit application
with multiple fuseactions - upload, download, delete, display_list,
display_icons. Now, as a user I have just deleted a file, so my URL is
http://www.site.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=delete&fileid=123&display=icons.
The delete fuseaction deletes the file and looks at url.display to decide
which way to re-display the files. All is fine. Now say that I also have
on this page a nested fusebox app which is a calendar (built as a custom tag
so it can be dropped anywhere). The little arrow pointing to the right
means I can go to the next month on that app. This nested fusebox calendar
app needs to call the current circuit application and pass enough
information so that the current circuit app can re-display itself (in this
case using icons instead of a list) and so that the nested calendar app can
change months. I can't use the current cgi.query_string to get consistent
information as in this case it is telling me to delete a file.
Here is my current thought - all circuit applications, before they display
anything should create a variable called request.hyperlink which would be
created with the following structure:
#cgi.query_string#?x=y&fuseaction=myapp.myfuse, where x=y are any variables
that the circuit application needs to recreate the page currently displayed.
Nested fusebox apps would then use the following hyperlinks - <a
href="#request.hyperlink#,myNestedApp.myNestedFuse">. Each fusebox app
would need to process the passed fuseaction list to see if they need to do
something or use a default fuseaction. The dots and commas should probably
be urlencoded also.
Is that too complicated? Too simplistic? How would others handle the same
situation?
What I definitely DO NOT want to have to do is make each circuit app
responsible for the fuseactions of nested apps. This doesn't make sense . .
. somehow the page request needs to make available enough information that
all fusebox apps on that page can figure out what to do independent of what
the other is doing.
Thanks . . .
<cf_bytheway inregardsto="theory">
The only theory class I took was Accounting Theory . . . wait 'til I write
the web app to do triple-entry bookkeeping. :)
</cf_bytheway>
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
