On 09-11-18 04:14 PM, Gavin Panella wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:06:43 -0500 "Francis J. Lacoste" <[email protected]> wrote:A fragment is a view.The common use case is not 'Get me a bug comment', but 'Create a bug comment and give me the result formatted through '@@bug-comment-details'. Or 'Subscribe this user' and gave me back '@@+portlet-subscribers, @@subscribers-count'.If we expect each widget to know what page fragments to update it'll become a tight bundle of spaghetti pretty quickly, especially if a widget it used on more than one page. Could the following pattern (probably has a name, but I don't know it) help avoid it, such that a widget A doesn't have to care about the presence or absence of widget B? widget A is going to add a subscriber, widget A says to client api machinery: "add subscriber, and get me +subscriber-fragment", widget B see this, is interested in subscriber changes, widget B says to client api machinery: "count me in, get +subscriber-xyz for me too", client api machinery sends request to launchpad: "add subscriber, get +subscriber-fragment, +subscriber-xyz" client api machinery dispatches results to widget A and widget B. ISTR that Christian Heilmann spoke of something like this at the Epic?
Interesting idea.
I /think/ he meant, why not use the same ingress point to the application as other web pages, rather than piping through the API?
Yes, that is what I meant :) Maris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
