Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 68095 invoked by uid 500); 17 Mar 2003 04:15:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 68082 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2003 04:15:34 -0000 Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (HELO out004.verizon.net) (206.46.170.142) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Mar 2003 04:15:34 -0000 Received: from verizon.net ([4.47.133.0]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.27 201-253-122-126-127-20021220) with ESMTP id <20030317041543.NMOG7930.out004.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:15:43 -0600 Message-ID: <3E754BF1.6040407@verizon.net> Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 20:15:45 -0800 From: Christopher Oliver Reply-To: coliver@apache.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Continuation in objectModel, Was: Discussion of Flow Issues References: <3E721CE1.3030308@verizon.net> <3E735557.4050205@apache.org> <3E74E5CA.2060204@anyware-tech.com> <3E751D4C.4030208@verizon.net> <3E752DBF.9000103@verizon.net> <3E75332E.5090804@verizon.net> <3E753728.3040709@verizon.net> <3E753945.9050907@verizon.net> <3E753B3C.4030607@verizon.net> <3E753F90.3000300@verizon.net> <3E7547B7.2010904@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out004.verizon.net from [4.47.133.0] at Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:15:43 -0600 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > Christopher Oliver wrote: >> 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. > > > > HUH? > /me extremely puzzled > Sorry, I'm not doing a better job explaining... Since you responded to it I guess you did read this: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=103128978404439&w=2 I'm not saying anything different. To quote Ovidiu: "The above explains how MVC could be really achieved in Cocoon with the control flow layer. Note that there is no direct communication between Model and View, everything is directed by the Controller by passing to View a context object constructed from Model data. In a perfect world, XSP should have only one logicsheet, the JXPath logicsheet. There should be no other things in an XSP page that put logic in the page (read View), instead of the Model. If you don't like XSP, and prefer to use JSP or Velocity, the JXPath logicsheet equivalents should be implemented." Regards, Chris