***************************** Team Allaire *****************************
I, on the other hand, both believe in human evolution (I began life as a
spotted salamander) and I WOULD hold my breath for an XFB standard. Well,
maybe not literally hold it, but you get the point...
-----Original Message-----
From: McCollough, Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 12:14 PM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: RIGID STANDARDISATION IN EXTENDED FUSEBOX
Ya know, if you browse the archives and roll the clock back exactly one
year, you'll read posts similar to this one, except you can search-n-replace
"XFB" with "FB3".
No FuseBox3 ever did emerge. And I wouldn't hold my breath for a standard to
emerge regarding XFB either.
Having used FB for a couple o' years now, its pretty clear to me that you
couldn't peg a "standard" on it. There is no version control, and really, FB
is a methodology, and as such, really isn't recognized by versions,
standards, and what not.
FB, and by extension, XFB, I feel, are methdodolgies that are evolutionary
(I believe in evolution, just not of the human species), with continual
"Best Practices" emerging that steer the future growth and maturation of the
methodology.
Case in point: The use or non-use of application.cfm. Initially, it was
considered bad form to use application.cfm, but over time, good case has
been demonstrated for the use of application.cfm in some circumstances.
Now, for sure, when CF5 comes out, and as more dev environments get FB'd, we
will see changes to the methodology that reflect the currently available set
of commands, and we'll leverage them to our advantage. We grow, and FB grows
with us.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hal Helms [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 2:57 PM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: RIGID STANDARDISATION IN EXTENDED FUSEBOX
>
> ***************************** Team Allaire *****************************
> I agree about standards for XFB. I want to be careful not to get carried
> away (always a problem when developers get together!!) but I think having
> standards is helpful. I think we should have a process for submitting
> ideas
> and then carefully consider them with an eye to an overall, comprehensive
> plan.
{redacted}
> Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
