Reinhard Poetz wrote: > Sylvain Wallez wrote: > >> My ideas, which are progressing slowly because of the lack of time, >> are really diverging from the current code base. So, if they one day >> come to life, I doubt they will deserve the name "Cocoon". > > I'm looking forward to hearing from your ideas. I think that the > architectural changes of Cocoon 3.0 will make it much easier to > experiment again in a "safe" way.
I'm currently going more on the "full-Java" side of things rather than the declarative way with XML files. The use of JDK 1.5 annotations allows for very clean and powerful things examplified by Stripes [1]. For complex forms, Wicket [2] uses the same kind of component model as CForms, but in a pure Java way, and is very powerful. All this goes in a direction that's very different from Cocoon, which is about declarative programming and allows people that don't master Java to do great things. My current project has *no* XML configuration file: I wrote a small library to do sitemap-like URL matching and request dispatching, we use PicoContainer, pure servlets, Velocity and Wicket. There's no need for complex or multi-format presentation and therefore no need for pipelines yet. I guess the no-XML approach is a kind of overreaction to the all-XML that I've used for years, and that truth lies somewhere in the middle. It does work well, though... That being said, I'm more than happy to see the architecture of Cocoon evolving towards a less monolithic way based on servlets. This is one of the key changes that can allow Cocoon (or parts of it) to be integrated into other environments. Keep up the good work! Sylvain [1] http://stripes.mc4j.org/confluence/display/stripes/Home [2] http://wicket.sourceforge.net/ -- Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net
