Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Marc Portier wrote:
>
>> Yo people,
>>
>> after the recent introduction of the WoodyPipelineConfig object, I am
>> tempted to change the line 125 in woody2.js
>>
>> see:
>> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/woody/java/org/apache/cocoon/woody/flow/javascript/woody2.js?rev=1.3&view=auto
>>
>> for: bizData["woody-form"] = this.form;
>>
>> towards:
>>
>> bizData[Packages.org.apache.cocoon.woody.transformation.WoodyPipelineConfig.WOODY_FORM]
>> = this.form;
>>
>> this is a natural reflex from pure Java land, but I'm left to doubth
>> now it this kind of more tight integration is desirable into the js-area?
>
>
>
> It *is* desirable, as the JS and Java code will use this string to
> communicate. So it's better to have it defined in a single location.
>
> So +1!
>
thx for confirming...
change underway...
-marc=
--
Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/
mpo@outerthought.org mpo@apache.org
|