On 11/10/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/>
> I suppose we could have
>
> <action name="Import Wizard State" method='#{wizardHelper.importWizardState}">
> <transition outcome="next" target="First Real Step"/>
> </action>
>
> for every dialog. It just adds 3 lines of XML for every single
> dialog. Kind of a pain.
>
<snap/>
>
> Anyways, just bouncing an idea around. I thought it might be too
> application specific. Perhaps other users will have similar needs and
> we can revisit it at that time.
<snip/>
I have absolutely no doubt that other users will come forth with the
same need. I also have little doubt that given enough time, someone
will come forth with a perfectly valid usecase for carrying out a
certain action at the end of a dialog, and will probably request a
seemingly obvious notation to handle that.
But this is, IMO, classic "shorthand vs. creep". If you can do what
you need to with the available constructs, proposals to introduce
shorthand notations that might save some markup should be very
carefully evaluated. As framework authors, be wary, because (lessons
learnt first hand from authoring a framework):
* Shorthands are less expressive (already pointed out in this thread)
* There is one more construct to code, maintain, document
* Creep is exponential (hey, you allowed foo, now give me bar,
freddy, frog and baz -- when I can already do everything I need)
-Rahul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
