cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Continuation in objectModel, Was: Discussion of Flow Issues
Date Mon, 17 Mar 2003 19:31:12 GMT
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:

> Umm... XSPs should be compared to JSPs, and yes, we already have set of 
> built-in objects (see any XSP java source file, or see XSPGenerator.java):
> 
>        /* Built-in parameters available for use */
>        // context    - org.apache.cocoon.environment.Context
>        // request    - org.apache.cocoon.environment.Request
>        // response   - org.apache.cocoon.environment.Response
>        // parameters - parameters defined in the sitemap
>        // objectModel- java.util.Map
>        // resolver   - org.apache.cocoon.environment.SourceResolver
> 
> The only thing which is missing is flow continuation and bean (new 
> kids), but these are provided by jpath logicsheet. And I can't built 
> them into core XSP because people want to separate flow into the block.

Between a hack-based flow implementation driven by the need to factor 
flow out and a clean flow implementation with no possibility to factor 
it out, I would vote for the second.

If the flow, in order to fit nicely in the cocoon picture, needs to 
accomodate changes in the internal architecture, it meanst that is 
should not be optional.

on the other hand, if we can find an elegant solution to keep them 
separate I'm all for it, but elegant integration is, IMO, more important 
than potential separation.

Stefano.


Mime
View raw message