on 10/17/2000 9:37 AM, "John McNally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am trying to figure out how this is going to be implemented differently than
> things are right now. You have an application, you create a base Screen/Page
> that pushes objects that are generally useful. You subclass the base modules
> to
> add objects that are more specific to a screen or two.
Exactly. But before, it was more encouraged to have a direct .java to .wm
relationship. Now, I'm saying that should almost not happen at all.
> Why make the designer have to decide whether the object has global, session,
> or
> page scope. I thought this was something in JSP that was overkill for a
> template system. If there is something being stored in the session that is
> global in scope add it to the context in a base module, if it is only relevant
> to a few screens, add it in a child module.
Right, I never was saying that. In fact, I said that was a bad idea.
-jon
--
http://scarab.tigris.org/ | http://noodle.tigris.org/
http://java.apache.org/ | http://java.apache.org/turbine/
http://www.working-dogs.com/ | http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
http://www.collab.net/ | http://www.sourcexchange.com/
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
