Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
The problem still remains that you can't call a derived classes static method in the base class. Static calls are called "static" for a reason - class names are resolved... well, statically :) - meaning, in compile time. E.g., "self" means "the class I'm currently in". Since there's no object, there's no vehicle to contain information like "no, I did't really mean ActiveRecord, I meant some other class derived from ActiveRecord" when you call a static method. There's simply no place - at least currently with PHP 5.x - which could carry such information. To fix it would mean to create such a place - some kind of hidden "this class" parameter or something else of this form.
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
The problem still remains that you can't call a derived classes static method in the base class.abstract class ActiveRecord { abstract static public function getTable(); static public function find() {
echo self::getTable(); }}class Person extends ActiveRecord { static public function getTable() { return __CLASS__; }}Person::find();Fatal error: Cannot call abstract method ActiveRecord::getTable() in /home/jhendric/test.php on line 7
Call Stack: 0.0004 40688 1. {main}() /home/jhendric/test.php:0 0.0005 40688 2. ActiveRecord::find() /home/jhendric/test.php:20On 9/28/06,
Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-- Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote(on Thursday, 28 September 2006, 10:20 AM -0400):> And that'll teach me to jump in on a conversation :)>> What about implementing an interface which specifies a getTable()
> method, then don't implement it in an Abstract AR class.>> That way when you extend, you write in a:>> function getTable()> {> return __CLASS__;> }>
> or you can even do:>> function getTable()> {> return "Somethingcompletelydifferent";> }>> I dislike this idea, I prefer just to instantiate the AR class and
> use it as an object :)This type of solution was discussed at one point. I believe it wasrejected because many felt it added what could be construed as one steptoo many in development. Instead of simply:
class MyTable extends Zend_Db_Table {}the developer now has to do:class MyTable extends Zend_Db_Table{public static function getTable(){return __CLASS__;
}}Admittedly not a lot of code, but it's another vector for introducingerrors.I'm not exactly sure where my own preference lies, personally.> On Sep 28, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Pavel Shevaev wrote:
>> > On 9/28/06, Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > Uh> > >> > > __CLASS__> > >
> >> > Not really, here's how it all started> > http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334377--Matthew Weier O'Phinney
PHP Developer| [EMAIL PROTECTED]Zend - The PHP Company | http://www.zend.com/
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
How would a change to the View require a change to the validation? Ideally, the View should be completely separate from business logic (Controller & Model). A change to the View should have no effect on the validation of the form elements. I can fully appreciate the debate between putting data validation within the Model or Controller. The use cases against putting validation in the Model are incoming data does not always flow to the Model and data flowing to the Model does not always need to be validated. IMO, the validation needs to be its own object instantiated in the Controller because it shares its duties between validating the incoming data and alerting the View to validation errors. I guess the majority of this debate comes down to how you design the form, the validation of the form, how the validation communicates to the View, and retrieval and/or storage of data from the form. My system is a lot like what Michael Minicki described on the Zend_Form proposal which has molded my opinions on this subject: http://framework.zend.com/wiki/display/ZFPROP/Zend_Form?rootCommentId=3957#comments Dale Jean-Baptiste HUNTZINGER wrote: >> MO, data validation should not be performed within the model but rather in the controller There is definitively many opinions about Validation in MVC, but I still don't agree with your statement. I want a solution that does not oblige me to rewrite my validation code each time my View changes - either I change the UI logic or the client technology -, since controller is tighly bound to the view. Model has all the info needed to performs the validation, and validation is purely domain logic, no ? Dale McNeill a écrit : IMO, data validation should not be performed within the model but rather in the controller. The controller could query the Table/Row for validator objects but its the controller that should perform all the validating of data. One thing that I would like to see in a future Zend_Db_Table is the storage of the entire "describe " rather than only storing the column names. Why? Well I've changed the Table to store this information so that the controller can query the Table for the fundamental validator objects. A "varchar(30)" can provide a validator that restricts the the length to 30 characters; a "int(10)" can provide an integer validator that restricts the maximum value to a 10 digit signed integer. I think in general the results of the describe table is very useful and certainly worth storing all the information. It could even be used to set the default values of any unset columns when performing an insert. Dale Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez wrote: On Wednesday 27 September 2006 00:47, Victor Bolshov wrote: Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? I mean a model, in the context of Model-View-Controller. As you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-view-controller Model: The domain-specific representation of the information on which the application operates. The model is another name for the domain layer. Domain logic adds meaning to raw data (e.g., calculating if today is the user's birthday, or the totals, taxes and shipping charges for shopping cart items). So.. from where I see.. the controller should create a model to get data or to return data, from wherever you want (DB, XML, RPC, log, etc). The controller should know "the action" what should be done, the bussiness logic. The model should know what to do with the data, validate the data, and all what is related with data. Now, I do not see any solution for that in ZF and I thought Zend_Db_Table could be use as a solution, but I was wrong and I started the post to see if anyone had the same idea and if anyone has solved that. I said "Model in MVC" to let people understand the context, so no one gets confused with "a model/guide to follow" or "a hot-long-legs-model" -- Jean-Baptiste HUNTZINGER
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
>> MO, data validation should not be performed within the model but rather in the controller There is definitively many opinions about Validation in MVC, but I still don't agree with your statement. I want a solution that does not oblige me to rewrite my validation code each time my View changes - either I change the UI logic or the client technology -, since controller is tighly bound to the view. Model has all the info needed to performs the validation, and validation is purely domain logic, no ? Dale McNeill a écrit : IMO, data validation should not be performed within the model but rather in the controller. The controller could query the Table/Row for validator objects but its the controller that should perform all the validating of data. One thing that I would like to see in a future Zend_Db_Table is the storage of the entire "describe " rather than only storing the column names. Why? Well I've changed the Table to store this information so that the controller can query the Table for the fundamental validator objects. A "varchar(30)" can provide a validator that restricts the the length to 30 characters; a "int(10)" can provide an integer validator that restricts the maximum value to a 10 digit signed integer. I think in general the results of the describe table is very useful and certainly worth storing all the information. It could even be used to set the default values of any unset columns when performing an insert. Dale Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez wrote: On Wednesday 27 September 2006 00:47, Victor Bolshov wrote: Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? I mean a model, in the context of Model-View-Controller. As you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-view-controller Model: The domain-specific representation of the information on which the application operates. The model is another name for the domain layer. Domain logic adds meaning to raw data (e.g., calculating if today is the user's birthday, or the totals, taxes and shipping charges for shopping cart items). So.. from where I see.. the controller should create a model to get data or to return data, from wherever you want (DB, XML, RPC, log, etc). The controller should know "the action" what should be done, the bussiness logic. The model should know what to do with the data, validate the data, and all what is related with data. Now, I do not see any solution for that in ZF and I thought Zend_Db_Table could be use as a solution, but I was wrong and I started the post to see if anyone had the same idea and if anyone has solved that. I said "Model in MVC" to let people understand the context, so no one gets confused with "a model/guide to follow" or "a hot-long-legs-model" -- Jean-Baptiste HUNTZINGER
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
IMO, data validation should not be performed within the model but rather in the controller. The controller could query the Table/Row for validator objects but its the controller that should perform all the validating of data. One thing that I would like to see in a future Zend_Db_Table is the storage of the entire "describe " rather than only storing the column names. Why? Well I've changed the Table to store this information so that the controller can query the Table for the fundamental validator objects. A "varchar(30)" can provide a validator that restricts the the length to 30 characters; a "int(10)" can provide an integer validator that restricts the maximum value to a 10 digit signed integer. I think in general the results of the describe table is very useful and certainly worth storing all the information. It could even be used to set the default values of any unset columns when performing an insert. Dale Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez wrote: On Wednesday 27 September 2006 00:47, Victor Bolshov wrote: Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? I mean a model, in the context of Model-View-Controller. As you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-view-controller Model: The domain-specific representation of the information on which the application operates. The model is another name for the domain layer. Domain logic adds meaning to raw data (e.g., calculating if today is the user's birthday, or the totals, taxes and shipping charges for shopping cart items). So.. from where I see.. the controller should create a model to get data or to return data, from wherever you want (DB, XML, RPC, log, etc). The controller should know "the action" what should be done, the bussiness logic. The model should know what to do with the data, validate the data, and all what is related with data. Now, I do not see any solution for that in ZF and I thought Zend_Db_Table could be use as a solution, but I was wrong and I started the post to see if anyone had the same idea and if anyone has solved that. I said "Model in MVC" to let people understand the context, so no one gets confused with "a model/guide to follow" or "a hot-long-legs-model"
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
> Basically, this is impossibility (in PHP) to get the class name inside > of a static method hi all I don't know if this was already mentioned but the php developers agreed on changing that behavior in the future versions. (there called it: late static binding) here is the thread in there mailing list: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11418520931&r=1&w=2 and this is the blog entry of a developer who looks like he is involved. http://www.digitalsandwich.com/archives/53-Late-Static-Binding-in-PHP.html
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
-- Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Thursday, 28 September 2006, 10:20 AM -0400):
> And that'll teach me to jump in on a conversation :)
>
> What about implementing an interface which specifies a getTable()
> method, then don't implement it in an Abstract AR class.
>
> That way when you extend, you write in a:
>
> function getTable()
> {
> return __CLASS__;
> }
>
> or you can even do:
>
> function getTable()
> {
> return "Somethingcompletelydifferent";
> }
>
> I dislike this idea, I prefer just to instantiate the AR class and
> use it as an object :)
This type of solution was discussed at one point. I believe it was
rejected because many felt it added what could be construed as one step
too many in development. Instead of simply:
class MyTable extends Zend_Db_Table {}
the developer now has to do:
class MyTable extends Zend_Db_Table
{
public static function getTable()
{
return __CLASS__;
}
}
Admittedly not a lot of code, but it's another vector for introducing
errors.
I'm not exactly sure where my own preference lies, personally.
> On Sep 28, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Pavel Shevaev wrote:
>
> > On 9/28/06, Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Uh
> > >
> > > __CLASS__
> > >
> >
> > Not really, here's how it all started
> > http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334377
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
PHP Developer| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zend - The PHP Company | http://www.zend.com/
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
And that'll teach me to jump in on a conversation :)
What about implementing an interface which specifies a getTable()
method, then don't implement it in an Abstract AR class.
That way when you extend, you write in a:
function getTable()
{
return __CLASS__;
}
or you can even do:
function getTable()
{
return "Somethingcompletelydifferent";
}
I dislike this idea, I prefer just to instantiate the AR class and
use it as an object :)
- Davey
On Sep 28, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Pavel Shevaev wrote:
On 9/28/06, Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Uh
__CLASS__
Not really, here's how it all started
http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334377
- Davey
--
Best regards, Pavel
--
LIMB - http://limb-project.com
Bureau of Information Technologies - http://www.bit-creative.com
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Uh
__CLASS__
- Davey
On Sep 28, 2006, at 4:17 AM, Pavel Shevaev wrote:
Basically, this is impossibility (in PHP) to get the class name
inside
of a static method
Yes, i can second that, it's one of the biggest obstacles in the way
of making model finder calls more "developer friendly". This is what
we're currently using: lmbActiveRecord :: find('News', ...) instead of
simply calling News :: find(...)
--
Best regards, Pavel
--
LIMB - http://limb-project.com
Bureau of Information Technologies - http://www.bit-creative.com
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
On 9/28/06, Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Uh __CLASS__ Not really, here's how it all started http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334377 - Davey -- Best regards, Pavel -- LIMB - http://limb-project.com Bureau of Information Technologies - http://www.bit-creative.com
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Basically, this is impossibility (in PHP) to get the class name inside
of a static method
Yes, i can second that, it's one of the biggest obstacles in the way
of making model finder calls more "developer friendly". This is what
we're currently using: lmbActiveRecord :: find('News', ...) instead of
simply calling News :: find(...)
--
Best regards, Pavel
--
LIMB - http://limb-project.com
Bureau of Information Technologies - http://www.bit-creative.com
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 05:08, Michael Yevdokimov wrote: > I am curious what others do with the missing Model Controller?? Me too.. I saw in the "IBM ZendFramework Tutorial" they do not use Models, they have the data validation, and all what should be in the model, inside the controller. This is something I do not like because they mix a lot of code together. Do you now have an abstract class for your own Model? Could you share it with me? I will send what I have in my next mail (got to organize it and make some documentation for it) -- Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez .-[Just me and the world I created]-. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://strgt.cjb.net phpgt: http://php.develsystems.com
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 00:47, Victor Bolshov wrote: > Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? I mean a model, in the context of Model-View-Controller. As you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-view-controller Model: The domain-specific representation of the information on which the application operates. The model is another name for the domain layer. Domain logic adds meaning to raw data (e.g., calculating if today is the user's birthday, or the totals, taxes and shipping charges for shopping cart items). So.. from where I see.. the controller should create a model to get data or to return data, from wherever you want (DB, XML, RPC, log, etc). The controller should know "the action" what should be done, the bussiness logic. The model should know what to do with the data, validate the data, and all what is related with data. Now, I do not see any solution for that in ZF and I thought Zend_Db_Table could be use as a solution, but I was wrong and I started the post to see if anyone had the same idea and if anyone has solved that. I said "Model in MVC" to let people understand the context, so no one gets confused with "a model/guide to follow" or "a hot-long-legs-model" -- Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez .-[Just me and the world I created]-. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://strgt.cjb.net phpgt: http://php.develsystems.com
RE: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
> I am curious what others do with the missing Model Controller?? ;) Controller: "dumping ground for miscellaneous stuff" http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-08/msg00513.html Controllers written by apps developers tend to be idiosyncratic (it's uh, heh, all in one JSP file, or, it's here in these 57 XML files, or something like that), anybody off the street would probably just rewrite it or if they had any sense generate it, rather than try to understand it...so controller-writing is essentially a waste of time for application developers. Something standard ought to be in ZF that can't easily be rewritten and that actually performs some service like, generates all your dropdowns or something, like Achievo TK. Trying to get ahead of the curve with Achievo TK now...nobody would have a chance of rewriting that, and it actually scales up to the 30 page business apps with the 27 wired dropdowns and other widgets. I don't know if you can say the same about RoR. Table-driven, yes. They know SQL. ATK is something on the order of Oracle Forms, or Sledgehammer, er what was that called?...oh yeah, IronSpeed. -R
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Michael Yevdokimov wrote: Hi again This is all interesting. So basically you mean that there can not be no such a term in MVC for PHP, like there is for ROR? I am curious what you think about Propel as a tool to 'emulate' models in php mvc? Though I would still agree that this is again just an ORM and not more than that. I just say that the *implementation* and the following *usage* of ROR-like models will definitely differ in PHP from that of Ruby. To be honest, I do not use any of these ORM things. I am still making SQL queries myself or with some visual software. So? ZF is offering you great functionality, which will help you reduce the amount of code in your applications. I created my own 'model controller' with the methods like insert, delete, etc. which actually just creating queries which are being sent later to ADODB php library. so from this 'model controller' I inherit all my models. Otherwise, I think there will be too much mass in my code. This reminds me something. I think I have seen that... ah, sure. I've seen that in ZF ;) (ok, almost every PHP-framework offers some sort of decision for thise kind of problems) I am curious what others do with the missing Model Controller?? ;) Personally, I usually have two kinds of models: one for DB tables/rows, and another for *domain/business* logic/relations. And I can say that there are situations when Domain Model acts as a controller (or at least we can say so). Cheers, Mikhail smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Markus Wolff wrote:
Victor Bolshov schrieb:
One cannot simply port Rails-ActiveRecord to PHP (there are certain
features used that are not yet implemented in PHP, possibly will be in
PHP6).
Hi Victor,
Just out of curiosity: What features do you think these are?
CU
Markus
Basically, this is impossibility (in PHP) to get the class name inside
of a static method:
class A {
static function func(){}
}
class B extends A {
}
B::func();// inside the func() method we *cannot* know that the caller
is class 'B'. It is *alwayse* 'A'.
Thus, the ROR approach (table methods are class methods, while row
methods are instance methods) is unreachable.
Regards,
Victor
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Hi again This is all interesting. So basically you mean that there can not be no such a term in MVC for PHP, like there is for ROR? I am curious what you think about Propel as a tool to 'emulate' models in php mvc? Though I would still agree that this is again just an ORM and not more than that. To be honest, I do not use any of these ORM things. I am still making SQL queries myself or with some visual software. I created my own 'model controller' with the methods like insert, delete, etc. which actually just creating queries which are being sent later to ADODB php library. so from this 'model controller' I inherit all my models. Otherwise, I think there will be too much mass in my code. I am curious what others do with the missing Model Controller?? ;) Cheers, Mikhail On 9/27/06, Victor Bolshov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michael Yevdokimov wrote: > Hello Victor, > > Could you please explain what the Model should be or how it should be > presented in ZF in your opinion? > Example is simple: I would like to use the model the same way as I do it > in Rails, i.e. putting all the database manipulations and data > validation into it. > > Thank you very much in advance. > One cannot simply port Rails-ActiveRecord to PHP (there are certain features used that are not yet implemented in PHP, possibly will be in PHP6). In *my* opinion, a model, indeed, should look like that of Rails. In LIMB-project ( http://limb-project.com ) they've recently have made a step towards making their model much like Rails' one. You may also take look at php-doctrine. But the *original* question was about "a model in MVC". To me, it looks like a senseless set of words. In MVC you are free to use any kind of model. Zend_Db_* does *NOT* provide you with an ActiveRecord, nor does it provide a means for validation and object-relational mapping. It is *just* what it is: a DBAL, a query-object, a Table-gateway and a Row-gateway. You may use it your application, and your application is free to acquire MVC architecture or some other architecture as well. Although there is sometimes a need for an advanced ORM in an application, the means provided by Zend_Db_*, should, as I believe, satisfy developer in 80-90% of cases. And, there is a strong doubt that a large-and-heavy ORM tool could really solve all the problems regarding application-RDBMS relation. Regards, Victor. PS. The question you have asked (if before we refer to the original question), should not be "what the Model should be or how it should be presented in *ZF* in your opinion?" - but instead "what the Model should be or how it should be presented in *MVC* in your opinion?". I cannot answer this question, and think nobody can. -- Michael Yevdokimov E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel. +31 (0) 61 4599307
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Victor Bolshov schrieb: One cannot simply port Rails-ActiveRecord to PHP (there are certain features used that are not yet implemented in PHP, possibly will be in PHP6). Hi Victor, Just out of curiosity: What features do you think these are? CU Markus
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Michael Yevdokimov wrote: Hello Victor, Could you please explain what the Model should be or how it should be presented in ZF in your opinion? Example is simple: I would like to use the model the same way as I do it in Rails, i.e. putting all the database manipulations and data validation into it. Thank you very much in advance. One cannot simply port Rails-ActiveRecord to PHP (there are certain features used that are not yet implemented in PHP, possibly will be in PHP6). In *my* opinion, a model, indeed, should look like that of Rails. In LIMB-project ( http://limb-project.com ) they've recently have made a step towards making their model much like Rails' one. You may also take look at php-doctrine. But the *original* question was about "a model in MVC". To me, it looks like a senseless set of words. In MVC you are free to use any kind of model. Zend_Db_* does *NOT* provide you with an ActiveRecord, nor does it provide a means for validation and object-relational mapping. It is *just* what it is: a DBAL, a query-object, a Table-gateway and a Row-gateway. You may use it your application, and your application is free to acquire MVC architecture or some other architecture as well. Although there is sometimes a need for an advanced ORM in an application, the means provided by Zend_Db_*, should, as I believe, satisfy developer in 80-90% of cases. And, there is a strong doubt that a large-and-heavy ORM tool could really solve all the problems regarding application-RDBMS relation. Regards, Victor. PS. The question you have asked (if before we refer to the original question), should not be "what the Model should be or how it should be presented in *ZF* in your opinion?" - but instead "what the Model should be or how it should be presented in *MVC* in your opinion?". I cannot answer this question, and think nobody can. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Hello Victor, Could you please explain what the Model should be or how it should be presented in ZF in your opinion? Example is simple: I would like to use the model the same way as I do it in Rails, i.e. putting all the database manipulations and data validation into it. Thank you very much in advance. On 9/27/06, Victor Bolshov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? -- Michael YevdokimovE-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Tel. +31 (0) 61 4599307 P.S. Privet iz Gollandii! :)
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Could you please tell in more detail - what you mean by "a model in MVC"? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
Did you mean $page->insert($data); maybe? I haven't worked much with
Zend_Db_Table yet but that looked like a possible reason why it was not
giving the expected result.
Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez wrote:
I thought I could Just do something like:
$page = new BizMS_Model_Page();
$data = array ('title' => 'My title', 'content' => $content);
$page->insert($page);
[fw-general] Zend_Db_Table is not a base for a model in MVC
I thought I could use Zend_Db_Table as a class to be extended so I could use
them as a Model in MVC
here is some part of my code:
class BizMS_Model_Page extends Zend_Db_Table {
protected $_name = 'bizms_page';
protected static $_tableName = 'bizms_page';
public function __construct($id = NULL){
parent::__construct();
if ($id && is_int($id) && $id > 0) {
$this->_data = $this->find($id)->toArray();
}
}
// [...]
}
I thought I could Just do something like:
$page = new BizMS_Model_Page();
$data = array ('title' => 'My title', 'content' => $content);
$page->insert($page);
wich I can.. and it seems like it is a Model from MVC
So the next thing I would like to do is to create a new Page:
$page = new BizMS_Model_Page($id);
To do this, I had to overload my "model" with the code above, but then I
can't call
$page->title
Is there a how-to create Models from MVC with ZF?
Thanks
--
Stuardo -StR- Rodríguez
.-[Just me and the world I created]-.
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://strgt.cjb.net
phpgt: http://php.develsystems.com
