On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, John Siracusa wrote:
> > You're right. It just looks kind of odd to me, invoking a template for > > something that is not a display-related task. It looks like the way > > people typically do MVC in Mason or Embperl, with a first template that > > doesn't do anything but invoke a module to take over the processing. > > ...but it has several advantages. I particularly appreciate being able to > add to or change parameters or behaviors before passing things off to the > controller, for example. I can have several "variants" of the same > controller living at different URLs, all pointing back to a single > controller object. I think that it is also more manageable by people who doesn't want to understand configurations; designers who worked with me found this approach handy. > Don't think of it as "invoking a template." Just think off it as an > inverted dispatch mechanism: the actions camp out at their locations, as > opposed to having their locations (in the httpd.conf) pointing at the > controller modules. Or something... :) And it is a sort of grid layout, mentioned by someone in a previous message; but it still remains an impure approach :( Ciao, Valerio Valerio Paolini, <http://130.136.3.200/~paolini> -------------------------------------------------- what is open-source about? Learn, and then give back
