This is probably even more off topic, but I've seen this mentioned before. >From what I can tell of their description of this "workflow" scope, it looks like it may be helpful as far as ease of use goes, but it doesn't offer any real technical benefit over the use of hidden form fields or sessions, in fact, the underlying implementation has to be something passing parameters of using the session, there just isn't any alternative in any compliant application servers.
As far as the objects being cleared when the user leaves the workflow, how is that any different the using the session correctly? If the user goes on to another page that is not part of your current "workflow" you can clear those objects or you wait until the user's session times out -- those are really the only two options. -Rob -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 4:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [OT] - Request against Session Hi Guys, I think the issue over here is, in such cases we need a new scope(workflow scope).The existing scopes(request/session) do not suffice in such cases. ... The session scope can be used but it may not be cleared.So there has to be a solution at architecture level.And the struts workflow extension http://www.livinglogic.de/Struts/introduction.html ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
