cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Fagerstrom <>
Subject Re: [Design] JXTG 2.0 (Just say no!)
Date Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:31:43 GMT
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> Now there are two approaches:
>  1) model 1: taglibs
>  2) model 2: controller + view
    3) model 3: taglibs + view

> Model 1 removes all the "underlying machinery" but leaves the "glueing" 
> to the one that does the template design, or forces two people to work 
> on the same file (which is bad).
> Model 2 removes both the underlying machinery and the gluing (request -> 
> order, birth-date -> age) and leaves the template designer with iteration.

We always use the 3:rd model. The first taglibs part contains the same 
stuff as you put in the controller but it is written by people who are 
skilled in SQL but they are in most cases not programmers. The view is 
written in XSLT, it might be designed by a designer in Dreamweaver, but 
then a developer typically embed it in XSLT so that we can use the same 
design for many pages.

> So, result: Model 2 is a clear winner in terms of SoC analysis, no 
> matter what interfaces the taglibs exhibit, no matter what syntax the 
> templates or the controller have.
> Why? because Model 1 removes the machinery but leaves the programmatic 
> glueing (which template designers' mindset don't contemplate).
> Model 2 does not.
> Result: taglibs are to be considered harmful, no matter what syntax.

Come on, with such comparisons you can prove anything. Don't you 
remember that you based Cocoon on xml-pipelines any more?


View raw message