I looked again at the Seam reference documentation, section "6.2. Nested conversations"
It cites correct behavior in the face of backbuttoning and workspace management as motives for nested conversations. "Seam Reference 6.2" wrote : A conversation may be thought of as a continuable state. Nested conversations allow the application to capture a consistent continuable state at various points in a user interaction, thus insuring truly correct behavior in the face of backbuttoning and workspace management. | | TODO: an example to show how a nested conversation prevents bad stuff happening when you backbutton. Using nested conversation to alleviate problems caused by the back button is exactly what you described in your post, Jacob (post #2 in this thread). On the other hand, if I think of breadcrumbs and the conversation stack (-> 6.7.5. Breadcrumbs), the use of nested conversations goes into a direction much similar to the composition of "subflows" my post #1 in this thread is related to. [More to follow] View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4085803#4085803 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4085803 _______________________________________________ jboss-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
