Agreed, especially with these latest (great) ideas from Rickard et all. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Ottinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 3:29 AM Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Ognl as replacement for WW EL
> I'd also like to point out that it's possible to view XWork as a different > product than WebWork. I don't know if that's the intent, but XWork seems > to be slightly hamstrung by trying to be "WebWork 1.4 nee 2.0" - which may > be acceptable, maybe not. > > It may be in its best interest to say "Well, we're trying to minimize the > impact, but let's be real, we're tossing enough out to say that it's > webwork-inspired, not webwork 2.0." That gives you a lot of freedom to > retain what makes sense from a project standpoint, while accepting that > some users will want to retain webwork's foibles and quirks instead. (I > may be one of those, depending on the high-quality docs that are sure to > follow an XWork release.) > > On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, [ISO-8859-1] Rickard Öberg wrote: > > > Vedovato Paolo wrote: > > > I think that it's a very important point to be able to switch to XWork > > > without having code changes AND to have all the improvements (like > > > performance etc.). > > > > Hm... not sure if that's realistic. Switching with minimal code changes, > > yes, but with no code changes I don't know. For example, *Aware > > interfaces should be gone. We might want to reconsider how context and > > pre/post processing is done too. For example, it would be entirely > > possible to use Action implementation wrappers instead of ActionFactory > > delegates (i.e. do stuff on execute() instead of on getAction()). Since > > I think most of us are seeing needs for that already (e.g. validation, > > security, various pre-processing) that would be a nice way to handle it. > > And it could also be an alternative way to do chaining. > > > > > So if there is extra work to achieve this it should really be considered. > > > That would lead to a really fast usage of XWork through the WebWork > > > community. > > > > Really Fast Usage of XWork is not the primary concern IMHO. I would MUCH > > rather have XWork be AS GOOD as it can be from both design and > > performance point of views, and have usage delayed somewhat. Having a > > compromised solution that only goes half the way is only going to hurt > > in the end. > > > > /Rickard > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
