Hi Josema, Could you describe the advantages and the possible application of this new feature.
Regards Sylvain -----Message d'origine----- De: Josema Alonso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Date: vendredi, 14. février 2003 14:08 À: Cocoon-Users Objet: extending XMLForms for different kinds of models...opinions? Dear all, I need your suggestions and opinions in extending the current XMLForm model approach. If you use XMLForm or are thinking about using it soon, I'd suggest youy to read this message and send some feedback to the list. Some days ago, and with some ideas I exchanged with Ivelin, I made a how-to that should help users on using XMLForm with Xindice for storing XML models. It is at Wiki (http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=XMLFormXindice) and made its way into the CVS a few days ago. In this how-to I explored new ways of storing the form model. This new way the XML model is stored in a file in the system with an empty structure. Then it is loaded into a JXPath Container and manipulated from there. The getFormModel() is overriden so you don't need a Bean, but just the file. Ivelin thought this could be a great addition to the framework, so we were discussing how to make this available for the end user. We exchanged some ideas and they led us to incorporating some mechanism to the sitemap. We were thinking about a prefix. This way, passing the model parameter to the form would be like this: <map:parameter name="xmlform-model" value="java:MyBean"/> The 'java:' prefix would be used for java models. If you would like to use the pure XML model approach you could do something like: <map:parameter name="xmlform-model" value="xml:MyDocument"/> Of course, one of the approaches could be made the default one so this could make life easier for most used models declaring them implicit: <map:parameter name="xmlform-model" value="MyModel"/> I hope I explained it clearly. Now I need your feedback. I'd like to know if this make sense to you and if so, we should decide which of the two approaches should be the implicit one, so the AbstractXMLFormAction would be modified accordingly. Maybe some of you would prefer to see it implemented but having the java models as the implicit ones, so you won't need to change your working xmlforms in order to use it in the future 2.1. If you feel that way, please say so. Best, Josema. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
