* brian moseley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [011025 20:39]: > containers to provide a particular set of functionality. whether the > application framework is openinteract or extropia or wombat or what > have you, it would be really nice for web application DEVELOPERS to > be able to rely on a single api for sessions, authen/authz, logging, > etc, whether or not they use mason or tt or whatever. it would also > be really nice for application DEPLOYERS to be able to rely on a > single application directory structure, config file, application > library location, war file format, etc. just as cpan and makemaker > force us to use certain conventions in order to provide great > benefit, webapp specs could potentially make application work much > easier.
Amen! Making it easier to develop, deploy and distribute nontrivial applications is a huge, huge plus, and to me is one of the most sensitive areas of development. By 'sensitive', I mean that a small change can go a long way to attracting developers to at least checking out a system. To me, this means I can package up my application with: - Object definitions (what they're named, how they're related, various serialization/persistence metadata) - Data structure definitions - Object data (required and/or sample) - Metadata about what actions are supported - Views (generally templates) - Code to accomplish everything necessary (object behavior, - Documentation Someone could download this application and install it by either running a few commands or dropping it into a directory. And then they could start having real fun :-) Chris -- Chris Winters ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Building enterprise-capable snack solutions since 1988.
