cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: [C2]Action proposal (long)
Date Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:26:47 GMT

Peter Donald a écrit :
> At 11:58  9/11/00 +0100, you wrote:
> >Giacomo Pati a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi all
> >>
> >> I'd like to thank you all for patiently waiting for this proposal.
> >> I know I was very ternse the last days. This is because I'm have
> >> to finish some projects apart from Cocoon.
> >>
> >> Action proposal
> >>
> ></snip>
> >
> >A few thoughts that came to mind when reading the proposal.
> >
> >As far as pipeline description is concerned, the sitemap is great : a
> >pipeline is simple sequence of transformations and the associated
> >language is compact.
> agreed.
> >Actions (which I think are *really* needed to build web apps with
> >Cocoon) are more complex since they tackle the logic of the application,
> >which can have a complicated structure. Action-chains are a kind of
> >reusable block (or a method ?), but I think very soon new needs will
> >emerge when people will use actions : if-then constructs, iterations,
> >etc.
> I would say these aspects are not needed - that sounds like a new scripting
> language - ewwww ;)

Well, I'm new to C2 and still have to understand all the power of the
sitemap. But redefining a new scripting language was just what I wanted
to avoid by suggesting to use Java in the sitemap.

> I think you should take the same angle as ant developers take. Namely place
> all complexity into the action and leave the sitemap as simple as possible.
> The sitemap is not meant to be aimed at someone who understands all the
> impacts of different constructs but more a semi-technical sitemanager.
> >So why not allow a kind of <map:logic> tag in some sections of the
> >sitemap to allow people to express complex behaviours directly in Java ?
> >Simple things should be simple (use the limited sitemap language wich
> >covers 80% of your needs), complex things should be possible (do it in
> >Java).
> Nooooooooo !! ;)
> While I are not a developer I would HATE to see this happen. It is meant to
> be simple to assemble to design and maintain. Allowing logic to creep into
> the sitemap seems like a massive violation of the seperation of concerns
> because no longer can the sitemanager understand the sitemap ;)

I understand your point of view and agree with it. But I'm very curious
about how application structure complexity can be handled by actions in
the sitemap. That's why I was also suggesting a kind of logicsheet
mechanism that would allow expansion of the sitemap without putting raw
java code in it or factorization of higher-level constructs.


View raw message