Hi, On 9/15/07, Pat Cappelaere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think that in a real-like application, workflows will be stored in > databases along with some meta-data and fully versioned. They are not > really url's (although they can be addressed by their urls if needed. They > are resources after all )
So what's the point then ? Densha cares about URLs. Anything that is not accessible via a URL does not exist. About versioning, here is a link to revision 1025 of a process definition : http://viewvc.rubyforge.mmmultiworks.com/cgi/viewvc.cgi/trunk/densha/public/process_definitions/vacation_request_0.rb?revision=1025&root=openwferu I'm not a vendor, I don't belong to a Coalition or an Initiative, I don't have legacy system whose tooling I have to sell. I keep it simple and I try to leverage the things that work in the web/internet around me. > Workflows can be launched by a user and may need some input, others are > launched via a remote invocation (and the parameters are passed in). > So for a user-based launch capability, you need form support. And you > probably do not want to keep customizing your application by adding views... I already have [a too generic] form support in Densha. If you really need the launch operation in Densha to fire up a form handler for workflow parameter initialization I will gladly implement that. > Hopefully, XForms will be integrated in FireFox soon. Unless someone has a > better solution. Yes, waiting eagerly for that, but scanning Rails for its form capabilities. Best regards, -- John Mettraux -///- http://jmettraux.openwfe.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenWFEru dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
