cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <sylvain.wal...@anyware-tech.com>
Subject Re: [RT] Revisiting Woody's form definition
Date Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:43:35 GMT
Antonio Gallardo wrote:

>Sylvain Wallez dijo:
>  
>
>>Not a problem, since <wb:assert> is just a particular implementation of
>>Validator. So what about :
>>  <wb:validate>
>>    <wb:auto-validate-using-business-model/>
>>  </wb:validate>
>>    
>>
>Hmm. At the first look it is great for people starting writing from now
>the beans! But, ... :(
>
>I see a problem:
>
>think in people that has already to many Beans? (This is not my case, but
>I think about other adopters that already had a good implemented Business
>model and what to use it with Cocoon).
>
>Also other problem is that we will force people to write the
>validationXXX()?, verificationXXX?, checkXXX()? or checkDirtyXXX()
>function in a defined style. This sometimes is not good. The Modular
>database implementation require to write database sequences in a defined
>style. If you already has a database this is not easy to rewrite it to
>make use of the modular database style.
>
>I am not trying to find or create a hair in the good taste soup. This are
>only random thought. :)
>  
>

I think you missed the real meaning of my post : since validators are 
pluggable, you can write you own and do whatever you want in it !

Cocoon should provide the most useful and generic implementations, but 
it does not lock with the provides implementations.

Sylvain

-- 
Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance  -  http://www.orixo.com



Mime
View raw message