On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Christian Haul wrote:
> On 14.Feb.2002 -- 12:17 PM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Piroumian, Konstantin wrote:
> > >
> > > 1) URL token: '/customer/*' -> action/method will be selected with {1}
> > > parameter. E.g.: /customer/add, /customer/update, etc. This can be used in
> > > links or 'action' attribute of HTML form.
>
> I agree that actions-sets do have some shortcomings. But I would
> argue that they should be abandoned instead of tinkered with. Instead,
> a macro like system would be more useful: something like a resource
> but that does _return_ (OK, you *could* use XML entities for that).
You must have gotten something wrong. Noone wants to abandone the
action-sets :)
> It would give you any flexibility you want and wouldn't be limited to
> actions-sets. For those, you could use any selector that uses whatever
> scheme you would like to use.
>
> I am quite sure that having that ability would solve many if not all
> problems that you are facing.
Although what you are talking about seems to be useful, too. This doesn't
solve the problems I am talking about. Especially think of the i18n
problem I was talking about...
> > > So, why not to have a AbstractMultiAction class that will get method name as
> > > a parameter? And all the descendant actions will only extend it will the
> > > acting methods. What about this?
> >
> > ...with the URL method... yes, this should work. But I had to restructure
> > all our sitemaps :(
>
> IMHO such a multi-action does not need to be supported by the
> sitemap. We have the ability to pass arbitrary parameters to an
> action. An action is able to dispatch arbitrary methods. The problem
> lies in the restricted flexibility of action-sets.
yes... with my last proposed idea the sitemap will not explicitly
support the multi-action but give another intelligent method that will
make our life's easier. ...and it will remove the i18n sitemap
dependency!!
> Thus I propose to have
>
> <map:pipeline-fragments>
> <map:pipeline-fragment name="action-set-foo">
> <!-- anything that is allowed to be in a pipeline -->
> </map:pipeline-fragment>
> <!-- more fragments -->
> </map:pipeline-fragments>
>
> with
>
> <map:match ....>
> <!-- ... -->
> <map:use-fragment name="action-set-foo"/>
> <!-- ... -->
> </map:match>
Indeed this would be cool. Right now we are using XML entities for that.
Auuuah - ugly ;)
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
