cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Oliver <res1c...@verizon.net>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Continuation in objectModel, Was: Discussion of Flow Issues
Date Mon, 17 Mar 2003 03:22:56 GMT
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> 
> Here you will have to explain to me why: Why whould you want to pass 
> *only* this "bean"?

Because that is the "contract" between the flowscript and the 
presentation layer.

> 
> And I still have question why don't you put this bean into request 
> attributes? And why have such bean in the first place, why not just use 
> request/session/application attributes?

Because when using the flow you maintain the application state in 
JavaScript program variables.

> 
> And also, how you will access session-fw data if you won't pass session 
> object? Same for xscript data and request/session/context objects?

Not sure what you mean here. Can you explain?

> 
> And last one, why VelocityGenerator must be the only one ... hm ... 
> crippled by the absence of request/session/etc?

That's not the case. All are equally crippled ;) For example, when using 
  Xsp, the idea is that the only logic sheet you will ever use is the 
jpath logic sheet. This does not give you direct access to session, 
request, or context but only to the bean object. Likewise with XMLForm, 
you only have access to the bean itself.

 >
 > Hope it's not too many questions :)
 >

Hope I'm answering some of them :)


Mime
View raw message