cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carsten Ziegeler <>
Subject Re: FOM inconsistency (was Re: [VOTE] Unrestricting the FOM)
Date Wed, 09 Feb 2005 20:27:49 GMT
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> This is clearly inconsistent.
> Furthermore, I really don't like this naming scope filled from different 
> sources (the object itself and some other data), especially when one of 
> the sources comes from the browser.
> And what about conflicts? Fortunately the object is searched before 
> request parameters, otherwise this would be a nice security hole.
> So, what do we do? Do we keep this inconsistent behaviour, deprecate it, 
> remove it now?
I personally would remove this syntactic sugar completly; it's imho not 
intuitiv what it means and the inconsistent implementation adds to it.
In addition it would make our unified object model implementation (for 
flow, jxtg etc.) much easier as we don't have to simulate this in Java.

Unfortunately, I fear that this is common use, so let's deprecate it 
with 2.1.x and remove for 2.2 completly

Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG

View raw message