Ahhh, you're deep into the theory this weekend. ;)
My preference is to provide a directory structure with common sense names.
Although it seems like magic some times, I don't think it's necessary to
keep the curtain up all the time. Seems like a pure personal preference
issue to me since we build individual self contained circuits and can use
relative URL's.
I am, however, interested in hearing the opinions of some of the more
frequent posters, who are apparently taking the weekend off (lucky people).
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Emilio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 3:02 PM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: Survey on directory structure usage
>Following the FuseBox architecture doesn't hide the directory structure, it
>only hides the templates, which are not incremental to the user experience.
>Steve
Hi Steve,
You're right I should have specified that I'm using the XFB approach which
does hide the directory structure through CF'including.
As a note however, intelligent naming of those directories and the functions
those directories provide is not covered in the Fusebox architecture as it
is programmer/owner/project preference. My point was more geared towards,
"should we consider" the naming of directories to be an important aspect of
the usability we programmers are providing.
Granted, fusebox IS a methodology for developers ( covering the whole life
cycle ) and the realm of usability resides outside fusebox per se, but if we
can bring more usable websites to the clients AND get them done way ahead of
schedule...that would be one more feather in the hat for what we are trying
to do #request.yourOpinionHere#.
Cheers,
Emilio
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
