RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
Hey,
1. Using this approach i'm loosing all advantages of flex
data binding, cause if i make decomposition (i did) of my
view, binding to specific property will be really painfull
thing and has to be done by hands.
So I don't *quite* follow your example ... If you could even give some
psuedo-code of the difficulty you perceive, that might help me grasp
what you see as a problem. To me, the idea of achieving reuse is that
the same component can be used multiple times within one application,
and between different applications.
However, at the highest level of abstraction (within the Application
tag for instance), it's acceptable for me that a reusable component
receive it's data from some application-specific data store (the
ModelLocator in this sense), while any dependant children (components
that you decompose) receive their data directly from their parent.
Imagine (from my previous example) that you have:
MyView.mxml
|
+-- MySubViewA.mxml
|
+-- MySubViewB.mxml
|
+-- MySubViewC.mxml
|
+-- MySubSubView.mxml
So we have our MyView.mxml component from my previous email, but now we
can look deeper at it's implementation and recognise that it decomposes
into several dependant children.
Now if what you're telling me is that your MySubViewB and MySubSubView
components also need to fetch that data from the ModelLocator, then the
approach I'd suggest is:
view:MyView.mxml instanceSpecificData={
ModelLocator.getInstance().theData } /
But then if you look inside MyView.mxml, it would contain:
view:MySubViewB data="" /
Rather than:
view:MySubViewB data="" ModelLocator.getInstance().theData } /
So only the parent container (MyView) interacts with the ModelLocator -
once it has the data, it's dependant child objects My(Sub)+(View)*.mxml
- there's a reg-exp for you - simply receive that data from their
parent.
For me, this is the correct abstraction of when to get data from a
parent, versus when to get it from the model.
Make sense ?
2. What about different set of delegates for every view
(depends on server architecture)??
While I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that delegates should
have a one-to-one mapping with views (I don't know your app, so I can't
comment specifically), I see no reason why the delegate layer should
impact on this model/view binding strategy.
3. Don't u think that restriction and freedom seems different?
Hey, I'm just a guy from the RIA practice. I'm not sure we have a
metaphysics practice. :-)
Best,
Steven
--
Steven Webster
Practice Director (Rich Internet Applications)
Adobe Consulting
Westpoint, 4 Redheughs Rigg, South Gyle, Edinburgh, EH12 9DQ, UK
p: +44 (0) 131 338 6108
m: +44 (0) 7917 428 947
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Flexcoders Mailing List
FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt
Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
SPONSORED LINKS
Web site design development
Computer software development
Software design and development
Macromedia flex
Software development best practice
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
Hi, Unless I don't fully understand your problem, the solution is simple. You don't need to create 2 different models for the same data. You create the variable to hold your data on the ModelLocator (ex.: ModelLocator.messages) and then bind this variables to controls on our 2 views. First part done. Now, when the owner logs in, you will get his messages and assign them to this variable, OR when a visitor logs in, you do exactly the same thing. You don't need 2 FrontControllers, always use one. I think your question has more to do with controlling what a visitor can do as opposed to a owner, which has more power. Yes? Dimitrios Gianninas -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of maxym.hryniv Sent: Mon 5/15/2006 3:29 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. Thanx for reply Tim, but you didnt't understand my question. If i bind the same value object (data) to more than one view(component) i'll have the same information in both views, but i must have different information. Before you change the view state, you dispatch the getMessages event (to return messages based on the user's role) - It's called HARDCODE and it's unacceptable. And i have to display different information at the same time in different instances of one view thats why your suggestion will not work. However thank you. Btw i have different delegates for different states cause of server side architecture. It's another one reason why it will not work. Waiting for reply. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, there are certainly more qualified people on this list (especially the creators of Cairngorm) that could give you some sage advice. But let me throw out a couple of ideas and try to help you. It's a little difficult to know what your use-case is exactly without seeing the code, but here is a simple scenario. There are two things to keep in mind. In Cairngorm, there is only one control class; the FrontController. Also, you shouldn't need to maintain two sets of data in the ModelLocator. You can bind the same value object (data) to more than one view (component). For example, let's say that you have: 2 views - visitorView and ownerView (view) 3 events - getMessages, insertMessage, updateMessage (control - FrontController) 3 commands - getMessagesCommand, insertMessageCommand, updateMessageCommand (commands) 3 delegates - getMessagesDelegate, insertMessageDelegate, updateMessageDelegate (business) 2 valueObjects - messageVO, selectedMessage (vo and model - ModelLocator) The views dictate which user gestures (events) are allowed to be dispatched; based on the role of the user (vistor or owner) For instance, both views allow the user to read messages (getMessages) and post messages (insertMessage). While only the owner view allows the user to edit messages (editMessage). Before you change the view state, you dispatch the getMessages event (to return messages based on the user's role). The event causes the getMessagesCommand to execute, which in turn instantiates the getMessagesDelegate class. The result from the service call is then cast to the messageVO, which resides in the modelLocator. The messageVO can then be bound to both views, since they both allow the user to read messages. Even though the VO is bound to both views, the user will only see the view that is associated with their role. The same scenario can be used for posting messages, because it is a common user gesture for both views. For the gestures that are unique to a view, like editing a message in the ownerView, you would only dispatch the appropriate event (updateMessage) that is allowed for the user's role. Simply stated, the ownerView would have an edit button and the visitor view wouldn't I know that this isn't your exact use-case, but hopefully it will give you some ideas. Regards, Tim Hoff --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, maxym.hryniv mokus@ wrote: Hy, coders. I have a question: We are creating social network portal. Any user of our network must have a possibility to create his own guestbook. I have questbook control that supports 2 states: Owner and visitor (created using viewstates mechanism). In owner mode you have full control of your guestbook and in visitor mode you can only post messages. When you open your own blog it uses one set of server Delegates and when you open another person blog it uses another set. If i use standart cairngorm approach i have to create 2 different sets of data in ModelLocator for owner view and for visitor view and then i have to create 2 different control classes. Can someone suggest me how to resolve this problem, cause i want to use the same control class. I'll probably have superuser mode, and i don't want to make a copypaste. Btw it's all about flex
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
Ok, maybe if you can provide some sample code or a screenshot of what these two views look like would help. Is it that the two views are going to update the data in two different fashions? Dimitrios Gianninas RIADeveloper Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maxym.hrynivSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:04 AMTo: flexcoders@yahoogroups.comSubject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. True, You don't understand my problem.I have1. 2 different set of delegates (different classes)2. 2 different data instances (the same data class)3. 2 instances of ONE view that support 2 modes.I have to see in THE SAME TIME one instance of view with one set of data and another with second set of data.Waiting for reply.--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Unless I don't fully understand your problem, the solution is simple. You don't need to create 2 different models for the same data. You create the variable to hold your data on the ModelLocator (ex.: ModelLocator.messages) and then bind this variables to controls on our 2 views. First part done. Now, when the owner logs in, you will get his messages and assign them to this variable, OR when a visitor logs in, you do exactly the same thing. You don't need 2 FrontControllers, always use one. I think your question has more to do with controlling what a visitor can do as opposed to a owner, which has more power. Yes? Dimitrios Gianninas -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of maxym.hryniv Sent: Mon 5/15/2006 3:29 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. Thanx for reply Tim, but you didnt't understand my question. If i bind "the same value object (data) to more than one view(component)" i'll have the same information in both views, but i must have different information. "Before you change the view state, you dispatch the getMessages event (to return messages based on the user's role)" - It's called HARDCODE and it's unacceptable. And i have to display different information at the same time in different instances of one view thats why your suggestion will not work. However thank you. Btw i have different delegates for different states cause of server side architecture. It's another one reason why it will not work. Waiting for reply. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Hoff" TimHoff@ wrote: Ok, there are certainly more qualified people on this list (especially the creators of Cairngorm) that could give you some sage advice. But let me throw out a couple of ideas and try to help you. It's a little difficult to know what your use-case is exactly without seeing the code, but here is a simple scenario. There are two things to keep in mind. In Cairngorm, there is only one control class; the FrontController. Also, you shouldn't need to maintain two sets of data in the ModelLocator. You can bind the same value object (data) to more than one view (component). For example, let's say that you have: 2 views - visitorView and ownerView (view) 3 events - getMessages, insertMessage, updateMessage (control - FrontController) 3 commands - getMessagesCommand, insertMessageCommand, updateMessageCommand (commands) 3 delegates - getMessagesDelegate, insertMessageDelegate, updateMessageDelegate (business) 2 valueObjects - messageVO, selectedMessage (vo and model - ModelLocator) The views dictate which user gestures (events) are allowed to be dispatched; based on the role of the user (vistor or owner) For instance, both views allow the user to read messages (getMessages) and post messages (insertMessage). While only the owner view allows the user to edit messages (editMessage). Before you change the view state, you dispatch the getMessages event (to return messages based on the user's role). The event causes the getMessagesCommand to execute, which in turn instantiates the getMessagesDelegate class. The result from the service call is then cast to the messageVO, which resides in the modelLocator. The messageVO can then be bound to both views, since they both allow the user to read messages. Even though the VO is bound to both views, the user will only see the view that is associated with their role. The same scenario can be used for posting messages, because it is a common user gesture for both views. For the gestures that are unique to a view, like editing a message in the ownerView, you would only dispatch the appropriate event (updateMessage) that is allowed for the user's role. Simply stated, the ownerView would have an edit button and the visitor view wouldn't I know that this isn't your exact use-case, bu
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
I am one of the committee members :) The cairngorm micro-architecture wasn't build to handlemultiple instances of the same view because in standard web apps, this is not required (usually you have one instance of a particular view). So this is the best way to accomplish this for now. Of course, because of Flex and the fact that you can pop-up multiple instances of the same view, this might be something that we will have to review in the future. Dimitrios Gianninas RIADeveloper Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maxym.hrynivSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 9:32 AMTo: flexcoders@yahoogroups.comSubject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. Yeah i thought about that way, but it sounds like work-around and doesn't fit to cairngorm architecture. Maybe someone of cairngorm authors can describe clean and logical solution?--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I asked for screenshot because an image can help understand exactly what you are getting at. Actually I missed the word "instance" in your previous post... so you can have X instances of the same view that can appear, each with its own set of data. That's similar to the a user admin app I created (screenshot below). In these cases, you can't use data binding, you will have to pass the view helper instance to the command object, so it can use the view helper instance to update the appropriate view. This is the way I did it and it works, there might be a better way, others can comment. Does that help? Dimitrios Gianninas RIA Developer Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maxym.hryniv Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:58 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. Dimitrios, thank you for quick reply, but please don't post reply if you are not in context. It's a question about architecture and i'm wondering why you are asking for a screenshot? I'll try to clarify my question I have 1. 2 different set of delegates (different classes) 2. 2 different data instances (the same data class) 3. 2 instances of ONE view (the same class) that support 2 modes. I have to see in THE SAME TIME one instance of view with one set of data (received by the first set of delegates - my guestbook messages) and another with second set of data (received by the second set of delegates - my friend guestbook messages). And probably i'll have a possibility to see 3 or X guestbooks in the same screen (depends on UI team solution - i don't care about UI) eachone with another set of data (different people guestbooks). Waiting for reply. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios. gianninas@ wrote: Ok, maybe if you can provide some sample code or a screenshot of what these two views look like would help. Is it that the two views are going to update the data in two different fashions? Dimitrios Gianninas RIA Developer Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]com] On Behalf Of maxym.hryniv Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:04 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. True, You don't understand my problem. I have 1. 2 different set of delegates (different classes) 2. 2 different data instances (the same data class) 3. 2 instances of ONE view that support 2 modes. I have to see in THE SAME TIME one instance of view with one set of data and another with second set of data. Waiting for reply.--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios. gianninas@ wrote: Hi, Unless I don't fully understand your problem, the solution is simple. You don't need to create 2 different models for the same data. You create the variable to hold your data on the ModelLocator (ex.: ModelLocator.messages) and then bind this variables to controls on our 2 views. First part done. Now, when the owner logs in, you will get his messages and assign them to this variable, OR when a visitor logs in, you do exactly the same thing. You don't need 2 FrontControllers, always use one. I think your question has more to do with controlling what a visitor can do as opposed to a owner, which has more power. Yes? Dimitrios Gianninas -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of maxym.hryniv Sent: Mon 5/15/2006 3:29 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
If I'm understanding this thread correctly, you have a component
MyView.mxml that renders some data, we'll call it myData. You want to
have multiple instances of MyView.mxml that render different instances
of myData - eg myData1, myData2, myData3, etc.
So I'm not sure why you can't manage:
view:MyView instanceSpecificData={ ModelLocator.getInstance().myData1
} /
view:MyView instanceSpecificData={ ModelLocator.getInstance().myData2
} /
view:MyView instanceSpecificData={ ModelLocator.getInstance().myData3
} /
Cairngorm as an architecture is not trying to address how you structure
your view - we're leaving the developer complete flexibility to
implement the view however they choose. What you are citing as a
restriction, is one of the degrees of freedom we are offering.
I wouldn't be using ViewHelpers here at all, I'd be using the
ModelLocator at an application level, holding data that different views
(whether they're multiple instances of the same view, or different views
altogether) are able to bind to and display.
Steven
--
Steven Webster
Practice Director (Rich Internet Applications)
Adobe Consulting
Westpoint, 4 Redheughs Rigg, South Gyle, Edinburgh, EH12 9DQ, UK
p: +44 (0) 131 338 6108
m: +44 (0) 7917 428 947
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maxym.hryniv
Sent: 15 May 2006 15:47
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2
instances of view with different data.
--
Flexcoders Mailing List
FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt
Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
SPONSORED LINKS
Web site design development
Computer software development
Software design and development
Macromedia flex
Software development best practice
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data.
Actually come to think of it, in the command, once the data comes back from the server, it can create the view (if its a pop-up window like in my case) and pass it the data. Don't know why I didn't think of this 4 months ago, but hey, we learn as we go along and this would be even cleaner. I'm going to change it next time I get the chance. Dimitrios Gianninas RIADeveloper Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim HoffSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:56 AMTo: flexcoders@yahoogroups.comSubject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. Communication is often difficult to achieve when cultural and language differences exist. I must applaud Dimitrios for his restraint. If I understand you correctly, you need to be able to show multiple instances of the same screen, with different data, at the same time. If that is true, you can still use a single VO (cast to an ArrayCollection) for all of the data and use a different filterFunction, for each instance of the screen. Since the screen is the same, I'm guessing that you are using a custom component and are creating a new instance for each new version of the screen. However, if you are only viewing one version of the screen at a time (view states), my original suggestion works. You just have to refill the VO, with new data, each time the view state changes. As far as your comment that I am suggesting that you HARDCODE event names, that's how Cairngorm defines that part of your application's structure. The names of your events and commands are hard coded in the FrontController. Unless your application is creating dynamic AS files, on-the-fly, I don't see a way around this. As far as the delegates are concerned it's almost impossible to suggest anything without knowing the server-side architecture and how you are retrieving data. It sounds like you have a pretty complex application, good luck working-out the details.Not Waiting for Reply,Tim Hoff--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "maxym.hryniv" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dimitrios, thank you for quick reply, but please don't post reply if you are not in context. It's a question about architecture and i'm wondering why you are asking for a screenshot? I'll try to clarify my question I have 1. 2 different set of delegates (different classes) 2. 2 different data instances (the same data class) 3. 2 instances of ONE view (the same class) that support 2 modes. I have to see in THE SAME TIME one instance of view with one set of data (received by the first set of delegates - my guestbook messages) and another with second set of data (received by the second set of delegates - my friend guestbook messages). And probably i'll have a possibility to see 3 or X guestbooks in the same screen (depends on UI team solution - i don't care about UI) eachone with another set of data (different people guestbooks). Waiting for reply. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios. gianninas@ wrote: Ok, maybe if you can provide some sample code or a screenshot of what these two views look like would help. Is it that the two views are going to update the data in two different fashions? Dimitrios Gianninas RIA Developer Optimal Payments Inc. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maxym.hryniv Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:04 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm microarchitecture. 2 instances of view with different data. True, You don't understand my problem. I have 1. 2 different set of delegates (different classes) 2. 2 different data instances (the same data class) 3. 2 instances of ONE view that support 2 modes. I have to see in THE SAME TIME one instance of view with one set of data and another with second set of data.Waiting for reply. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitrios Gianninas" dimitrios. gianninas@ wrote: Hi, Unless I don't fully understand your problem, the solution is simple. You don't need to create 2 different models for the same data. You create the variable to hold your data on the ModelLocator (ex.: ModelLocator.messages) and then bind this variables to controls on our 2 views. First part done. Now, when the owner logs in, you will get his messages and assign them to this variable, OR when a visitor logs in, you do exactly the same thing. You don't need 2 FrontControllers, always use one. I think your question has more to do with controlling what a visitor can do as opposed to a owner, which has more power. Yes? Dimitrios Gianninas -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of maxym.hryniv Sent: Mon 5/15/2006 3:29 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.
