cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Lewis <andy.le...@veritas.com>
Subject Re: RFC: Logic TagLib
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2001 14:47:10 GMT
I have less than no votoing rights, being a lurker here, but I 
completely agree with the seperation of concerns issue here. I actually 
am hesitiant about both XSP and JSP as a whole for exactly that reason.  
While they are really cool, I don't like risking my business logic - or 
really any significant logic ending up in the middle of my display code.

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> Jeremy Quinn wrote:
> 
>> Dear Cocooners,
>> 
>> I develop XSP TagLibs, as part of my work on the CRUDLET project.
>> 
>>         <http://www.crudlet.org>
>> 
>> We have developed a draft proposal of a TagLib for handling "content
>> logic" for webapps; to allow contextual content selection logic to be
>> encoded in an XSP page without the user having to write Java Code
>> inside <xsp:logic/> tags.
>> 
>> This is something that was critical for our project to allow us to
>> develop in a more scaleable way to the techniques we are using now.
>> 
> 
> I'll be honest: I don't like XMLized scripting languages as a general
> rule.
> 
> It blurs the separation of concerns: who is going to use this syntax? a
> programmer? a document writer?
> 
> Having a procedural programming language included into your page as
> another namespace appears more elegant than having a scriplet or
> something like that, but it's nothing different conceptually.
> 
> Cocoon should aim at keep separation well defined and avoid unnecessary
> blurring.
> 
> Let's keep the example above: it is the programmer concern to handle the
> error case where the request parameter is empty, *NOT* the
> document/template writer's. 
> 
> Do we want to create a scripting language using XML as a syntax? why? I
> see this as FS big time!
> 
> The above should be written as
> 
>  <mylogic:do-something>
>   <request:get-parameter name="blah"/>
>  </mylogic:do-something>
> 
> which should take into account all the errors. What about the error
> string? Right, it should be the writer's concern so we place it here
> 
>  <mylogic:do-something>
>   <mylogic:message name="empty-param" xml:lang="en">
>    The request param is empty.
>   </mylogic:message>
>   <mylogic:blah>
>    <request:get-parameter name="blah"/>
>   </mylogic:blah>
>  </mylogic:do-something>
> 
> and the contract with the document writer is simply the schema that
> "mylogic" namespace has. 
> 
> So, general anti-pattern: when you see <if>, <else>, <for> or even
worse
> <goto> beware: you are turning a declarative syntax into a procedural
> semantic. And yes, even XSLT is somewhat too procedural in many parts.
> 
> Disclaimer: this is my personal opinion only and I have no voting right
> at this moment so you decide what to do.
> 
> My feeling is that people will start small and end up asking for an XML
> rewrite of their favorite programming language, which is pretty scary,
> don't you think?
> 


Mime
View raw message