On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:53:10 +0100, Pilgrim, Peter wrote:
>�One more thing: Could we finally start designing to Java interfaces
>�into Struts<sup>2</sup>? Ta.
>
>�interface IActionRequest { ... }
>�interface IActionResponse { ... }
>�interface IActionForward { ... }
>
>�interface IActionContext {
>� ������IActionRequest ��������getRequest();
>� ������IActionResponse��������getResponse();
>�}
>
>�PS: Got a feeling some of this has been done within Commons Chains
>�when I last looked at the jarbundle/.Yes, for a longer list of "one more things", see the Jericho whiteboard :) http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsJericho I'm a fan of Commons Chain, and I do imagine we'll see the same design patterns and coding standard in Struts Next Generation. And, speaking of whiteboard, see also http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons/chain/WHITEBOARD.html?view=markup On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:53:10 +0100, Pilgrim, Peter wrote: >�I think we need to define a feature common denominator table of >�what constitutes a request and response as we know they exist now. I'm of like mind, but I'd like to take a step farther back and define a set of Struts use case scenarios, for both this generation and the next. >�(0) Client submits request >�(1) System receives the incoming request >�(2) System transfers matching values to a form object > (3) System >�validates the object > (4) System branches to success or failure. >�(4a) On success, system executes/delegates the business logic. > (4b) On failure, system returns the faulty input. >�(5) A view displays the nominal result or redisplays faulty input. And so on. Then we'd have a clear idea of what we are building the interfaces to do. Of course, any contributions here would be welcome. -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
