I do keep thinking that a single stack might not be the best mechanism
for a Web application, where we have no control over the client.
It might be that each workflow would have it's own stack, or cursor, so
that if the actor entered it again, they would be returned to where they
left off. So, if I'm on step 3 of workflow z, and then punch in some url
and wander around for a while, if I later select a link to workflow z,
I'd be returned to step 3 again. When workflow z finally completed, it
might have a link back to workflow q, which when accessed would pickup
whereever it left off.
It might be that we could do something with copying a set of workflow
mappings out of the application resource into a session resource, where
they could be modified for the actor. For example, to dynamically link
the last step back to another workflow, or update a cursor as to the
current step.
Ronel Sumibcay wrote:
>
> Has anybody thought about what happens when a user cancels 'sub-workflow'?
> Should there be a path defined for each local ActionForward for this case?
> Thus allowing a way to get back to the parent workflow if this occurs, or is
> this functionality already implied in this discussion when a sub-workflow is
> popped from the stack.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 8:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ActionMapping Workflows
>
> I'm thinking about scripting workflows through the ActionMappings.
>
> Each step in the flow would be a mapping, and the ways the steps could
> branch would be local forwards for those mappings. As you progress
> through the workflow, the Action decides which logical forward to
> return.
>
> I'm finding that if we can specify the path for a html:form path
> dynamically, then it becomes much easier to plug an ActionForm into a
> different context and have it submit back to the current "workflow
> mapping", and have a different set of local forwards available to the
> Action.
>
> I'll be making more sample code available as it is developed.
>
> Jonathan wrote:
> >
> > Can I ask how you all are thinking about bouncing around between steps in
> > the workflow? Is it a stack that each step gets popped off? Arent
> workflow
> > steps cyclical sometimes? Developers talk alot about graphing workflows
> but
> > I have not read about the implementation.
-- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
-- Custom Software ~ Technical Services.
-- Tel 716 737-3463.
-- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/
