cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Heinicke <jheini...@virbus.de>
Subject Re: XSP "official" position
Date Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:29:40 GMT
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>> If you wanna compare you need to compare Flow vs. Actions and XSP vs. 
>>> Transformers (or other server pages / templating approaches).
>>
>>
>>
>> The discussion really takes a strange way when comparing these both 
>> concepts.
> 
> 
> ...not any stranger than comparing Flow vs. XSP ;)

Flow vs. XSP was actually what I meant.

>> IMO it's obvious: the mixture of coding languages (Java + XML) and the 
>> mixture of abstraction levels. But this abstraction does not make the 
>> coding easier, you have to know the implementation details to work 
>> around all possible mistakes: How often it is suggested to have a look 
>> at the generated Java files! In general we need a XML only XSP (i.e. 
>> without any Java written by hand) with minimum of flow support:
>>
>> <xsp:if>, <xsp:for-each>, etc.
> 
> 
> ...because it should only be used as view. agreed
> 
>> Yes, afterwards it's very similar to XSLT or other template languages 
>> as JXTemplate.
>>
>> The power of XSP is not XSP itself, but the further abstraction levels 
>> as esql as Leszek pointed out. This would make an XML only XSP to a 
>> really powerful template language in contrary to a programming 
>> language with nasty syntax at the moment.
> 
> 
> ...well, totally agree. But that's only a question how it used - isn't
> it? XSP leaves room for heavy abuse! I guess that's the major problems.
> ...plus that debugging is a pain :)

Exactly, we must do it impossible to abuse it :-) Going towards an XML only 
template language would also allow to have an interpreter instead of 
compiling transformed java files.

-- 
System Development
VIRBUS AG
Fon  +49(0)341-979-7419
Fax  +49(0)341-979-7409
joerg.heinicke@virbus.de
www.virbus.de


Mime
View raw message