cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: Discussion of Flow Issues
Date Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:13:08 GMT
Christopher Oliver wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>> Great, integration between different not-all-flowable parts is a 
>> *real* need for sessions in the FOM.
>> So +1 to add it.
>> Anybody against it?
>> Stefano.
> -1 for this reason. As mentioned in other mails, direct access to the 
> session isn't needed in Ugo's case.


> +1 for a different reason: I think direct access to the session will be 
> needed for backward compatibility with existing Cocoon components (e.g. 
> Portal) that use the session for communication. 

I see.

> But this could be 
> encapsulated in a higher level JavaScript API that internally manages 
> the session (like what I did with XMLForm). What do you think?

Please elaborate more on this. Sounds interesting anyway. I would love 
to see the session disappear or, at least, provide a better abstraction 
to it.

> Another 
> possibility is to only expose the session at the Java level (not 
> JavaScript) forcing new JavaScript objects that need access to it to be 
> written in Java. This might prevent abuse.

Hmmm, if you don't get a hook to the ObjectModel, how can you get a java 
session object from the flow?


View raw message