cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Simmons" <deri...@arcor.de>
Subject Re: XMLForms Versus Traditional HTML forms.
Date Wed, 29 Jan 2003 04:56:51 GMT
Well, if you want my advice stay away from entity beans. They are evil in the
extreme. As for forms being in draft, that bothers me. I do, however, have
allot of actions I need to write and some common method of outputting the
forms automatically based on the command being run would be interesting to
me. I might take a hybrid approach here.

What Id like to have happen is that a user decides to execute a command which
hits a generator with the name of the command and any initialization
parameters. Then the generator spits out a document containing the structure
of needed information from the form. Then the style sheets take over and
render the forms and then the user can submit them. To do this I might just
borrow the XML form namespace and have the generator spit out valid XML form
documents.

Just thinking out loud.

-- Robert


----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Howard" <cocoon@leverageweb.com>
To: <cocoon-users@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 5:59 AM
Subject: RE: XMLForms Versus Traditional HTML forms.


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Simmons [mailto:derisor@arcor.de]
> >
> > As for multi-content, I could easily write a transform that
> > converts things
> > to WML based forms. Its a matter of taste. Its also a matter of
> > necessity. I
> > have already spent too long working on the presentation layer to
> > my project
> > and I don't care to invest another month. I am not merely a learner but a
> > professional with tight deadlines. I'm not sure its worth the
> > extra effort.
> > But the "not sure" is why I posted the question. If I was sure, I
wouldn't
> > have posted.
>
> One potential upside is the fact that XMLForms uses beans for the datamodel
> (I think).  that being the case, I have assumed there'd be a way to let
> ejb's fill that role (which based on past discussions I assume you're using
> here) and you'd get the binding to/from the form for free as you can in
jsp.
>
> >
> > Another thing is if it is in draft than that would be one reason
> > for me to do
> > it the old way. Real business applications require something that
> > works. That
> > isn't always the same thing as something that is "cool".
>
> I've not used xmlform yet because of the draft status and the time to
> learn - same issues you raise.  Looks quite promising though, especially if
> the bean hunch pans out.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please check that your question  has not already been answered in the
> FAQ before posting.     <http://xml.apache.org/cocoon/faq/index.html>
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:     <cocoon-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:   <cocoon-users-help@xml.apache.org>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please check that your question  has not already been answered in the
FAQ before posting.     <http://xml.apache.org/cocoon/faq/index.html>

To unsubscribe, e-mail:     <cocoon-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:   <cocoon-users-help@xml.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message