cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ugo Cei <u....@cbim.it>
Subject Re: JXForms vs. Woody vs. KISS
Date Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:58:44 GMT
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 28.10.2003 21:23, Ugo Cei wrote:
> I'm not convinced, Ugo. I'm sure it's possible to have a declarative 
> flow approach. Only the interpreter or generator must be intelligent 
> enough. Of course a declarative approach is always somewhat restricting, 
 > but isn't this desired? It works for the sitemap itself. And there are
 > also workflow markup languages on the run. But such an XML based flow
 > interpreter engine might be a big thing and independent of Cocoon.

Of course it's possible. It's just that XML syntax is so horribly 
verbose with respect to any decent programming language that it makes my 
skin cringe. I've seen (well, not seen, but heard of) Cocoon sitemaps 
growing to be a horrible mess of nested actions, matchers and selectors 
just because people didn't want to write any Java server-side code.

Fortunately, flowscript blows all of this away. Does it require that 
more than a minimum of server-side code be written? Well, yes, so what?

My opinion is that continuation-based flowscript is the greatest thing 
since sliced bread. It's a revolutionary way to write web apps and we've 
just started scratching the surface of what can be accomplished with it. 
It's simply natural that whatever forms framework Cocoon ends up with be 
intimately tied with the flowscript. After all, most web apps are 
nothing more than lots and lots of forms.

	Ugo





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


Mime
View raw message