Hi, all. I've been just an observer on this very interesting thread,
with little to contribute in favor of either idea. However, in reading
through the 73 (!) posts I had not yet seen when I came in today,
something striking occurred to me.
I saw the two camps as Keep display code separate
Lol, yea she gave up on that site, I was trying to teach her some basic web
design, but she lost interest.
Every rose was always my song :-)
-Original Message-
From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 January 2006 02:38
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
was looking
I don't suppose dreamweaver templates would work? They do for me, but I'm
not working with 2400 pages!
Jenny
-Original Message-
From: Bobby Hartsfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 December 2005 20:10
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Separating anything wasn't
Oh my, I'm going to agree with Russ ;)! Happy new year Russ :-)
-Original Message-
From: Snake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 January 2006 01:30
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
To which you say.
OK go with x, and then when your not happy with the work, come and pay
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Oh my, I'm going to agree with Russ ;)! Happy new year Russ :-)
-Original Message-
From: Snake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 January 2006 01:30
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
To which you say.
OK go with x
Understatement.
Hasn't anyone come round your house and kicked your ass yet :-)
-Original Message-
From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 January 2006 01:46
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
lol sh***tt
hey im ok and fun, just short tempered lol
its
://explorerdestroyer.com/
http://www.killbillsbrowser.com/
From: Snake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 7:44 AM
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Understatement.
Hasn't anyone come round your house and kicked your
the entire ITIL suite of best practices
is built up from the experience of professionals who have seen what
goes wrong when alternative practices are followed.
All this is very nice in theory, but it does not prevent anyone from
making the mistake
of applying the conclusions of those
Claude's question was what is the value of separating presentation
logic from application logic?
Exact, however it was still under the subject of separating presentation
logic from application logic
IN THE APPLICATION.CFM file, which I'm still not convinced about.
--
I'm afraid you have lost me. Aqua-net ?
-Original Message-
From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 January 2006 17:30
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
nope but you are more than welcome to come over and give it a try ;) Nice
hair btw~ haha damn that was worse
/
From: Snake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:19 PM
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
I'm afraid you have lost me. Aqua-net ?
-Original Message-
From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 January 2006 17
Why do we have neat little plastic things to keep our knives, forks,
and spoons
separate? It's all organization.
The problem is not with idea of separating, the problem is with what
you are separating
Beside forks and spoons, certain religious persons also have two fridges
and two sinks in
://acoderslife.com
-Original Message-
From: Claude Schneegans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 1:53 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
I suspect you could write your entire application within
Application.cfm. However, I don't think that would
Daniel San, wise is the man who fears the client saying it's a simple
application...
-Original Message-
From: Bobby Hartsfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 December 2005 15:33
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Cute little anecdotes or Mr. Miagi/Yoda/Silent Bob like
Lol... see... didn't change a thing
..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
Bobby Hartsfield
http://acoderslife.com
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 11:31 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Daniel
lol Ade .. which is often followed by and we've been quoted half that price
by x .
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 December 2005 16:31
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Daniel San, wise is the man who fears the client saying
Separating logic from display may be good in theory, but it just
does not correspond to reality when dynamic HTML is involved. If
there is no logic in dynamic HTML, then it's not dynamic anymore.
No one's saying you shouldn't have any logic in your HTML generation. The
question is, what sort
what is this? CF_FotuneCookie_Talk?
I was simply using similes. They're pretty commonly used in English. So are
metaphors.
Cute little anecdotes or Mr. Miagi/Yoda/Silent Bob like sayings
won't change it.
Uh, you know, I thought Silent Bob was ... silent?
The person who asked the question
Oh, and just one additional item; I was responding to Claude's question
about why you should separate presentation logic from business logic at all.
If you don't think that's a worthy topic of discussion, I can only
respectfully disagree.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
my preference is to use a spoon for that would that be ok with you?
Why not ? As far as he keeps them separated from forks ;-))
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm
(Please send any spam to this
Separating anything wasn't the question of this topic... it's how to include
something in 2400 pages easily (by the time you started posting anyway)...
and in this case it would be done easily with Application.cfm (you've
agreed) but separating milk from eggs or planting trees or spooning with
Separating anything wasn't the question of this topic... it's
how to include something in 2400 pages easily (by the time you
started posting anyway)...
Again, if you read the entire thread carefully, you will see that I replied
to a specific question posed by Claude. His question was not the
Because professional experience has shown that a scalpel works better.
To get back to the IT world, the entire ITIL suite of best practices
is built up from the experience of professionals who have seen what
goes wrong when alternative practices are followed. To say that there
are no best
To which you say.
OK go with x, and then when your not happy with the work, come and pay me to
do it properly.
-Original Message-
From: Jennifer Gavin-Wear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 December 2005 17:06
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
lol Ade .. which is often
Imagine a road trip with Will and Dave GULP
-Original Message-
From: Bobby Hartsfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 December 2005 20:10
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Separating anything wasn't the question of this topic... it's how to include
something in 2400
://explorerdestroyer.com/
http://www.killbillsbrowser.com/
From: Snake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 8:35 PM
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
Imagine a road trip with Will and Dave
-Original Message
cfsavecontent variable=LiteralDave
pre
but I'd prefer it if you didn't complain to me about it.
Isn't that usually the best practice when you find you don't like
something? Open it up for discussion/debate/argument/barrage of similes?
At any rate... I prefer to do so.
Thank you very much for
At any rate... I prefer to do so.
...
But im sure none of those experiences concluded that putting html
or includes in an Application.cfm doesn't work
In that case, you should read the thread so you can understand what we were
actually discussing, rather than assuming we were discussing
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 9:28 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
At any rate... I prefer to do so.
...
But im sure none of those experiences concluded that putting html
or includes
I'm afraid this discussion has veered off-course and into the land of
personal bickering. I propose that each of us drop the discussion and
consider ourselves the victor.
Later on, we can sit at the pub with our mates and talk about how we
obliterated our opponent in an online discussion group
Agreed - that's the best post this year (of course it's 2006 now in
Oz, so there aren't that many posts with which to compare :-)
On 1/1/06, Michael Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm afraid this discussion has veered off-course and into the land of
personal bickering. I propose that each of
On 12/31/05, Snake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK go with x, and then when your not happy with the work, come and pay me to
do it properly.
My job title is Janitor for precisely this reason. Cleaning up big
systems that started out as being made by creative souls who skipped
barefoot thru the
On 12/31/05, Michael Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Later on, we can sit at the pub with our mates and talk about how we
obliterated our opponent in an online discussion group about proper coding
practices in a web-based programming language. Our collective glory will
blind the masses.
Sake to me.
Straight from the bottle? You're a good man.
On 12/31/05, Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/31/05, Michael Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Later on, we can sit at the pub with our mates and talk about how we
obliterated our opponent in an online discussion group
If it works, stick with it.
Ade
-Original Message-
From: Tim Claremont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 16:30
To: CF-Talk
Subject: HTML In Application.cfm
I have heard some people advise against the use of HTML in the
Application.cfm file. I am wondering what the logic
I would never use Application.cfm for output. As far as I'm concerned
its strictly for internal-use code. So I wouldn't use raw html OR an
include. I would use the include on my display template. I regard
Application.cfm as part of the processing tier of an app, not the
display tier.
I would
I would never use Application.cfm for output. As far as I'm concerned
its strictly for internal-use code. So I wouldn't use raw html OR an
include. I would use the include on my display template. I regard
Application.cfm as part of the processing tier of an app, not the
display tier.
I
as well). Is there
any real problem with doing this except that it doesn't fit in with the
idea of what you say it should be like?
Original Message:
-
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 09:45:28 -0800
To: cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Subject: Re: HTML
But what is your rationale for the opinion that it should not be done?
It seems to me that placing a CFINCLUDE referencing a navigation bar at the top
of each and every one of my 2400 cfm pages in my intranet app is more
bass-ackwards than merely placing the code in question in the
Application.cfm is a file that runs on every cfm page.
Anything you do that should be done on every page can be moved to the
application file.
If you want to keep the display code separate from the logic, use an
include or a tag to display it, but feel free to put it in there.
I see no reason
There is nothing technically wrong with placing html or any other display
layer code in the Application.cfm.
SOME developer believe that you should never mix action / object code with
display code. This is simply personal coding practice rules that many people
live by. They are in no way right
That isn't really an answer however. You are saying not to do it, but why
not? Is it personal preference or is there a specific reason why this is to
be avoided.
I use it myself as well when I need something at the top of every page (and
to check security to make sure you can view that page
But what is your rationale for the opinion that it should not be done?
It seems to me that placing a CFINCLUDE referencing a navigation bar at the
top of each and every one of my 2400 cfm pages in my intranet app is more
bass-ackwards than merely placing the code in question in the
Thanks for the example Bryan.
In my experience, the situation you describe has, in fact, come up from time to
time.
It has happened so infrequently however that I have gotten away with creating a
directory (usually a subdirectory of the directory containing the calling page)
on my site called
I've just had a thought...
if you don't want the header in the pop-up and you don't want a sub
application, cfcontent reset=true, no more header :OD
Ade
-Original Message-
From: Tim Claremont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 17:35
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML
No argument there either. When I started this intranet application close to ten
years ago there were few enough pages to where a site template would have been
akin to putting an elevator in an outhouse. No chance of going back now
Well Tim having 2400 pages that are not run based on a site
Hey Tim,
Yep...alot does depend on the size/complexity of the app. I've built a lot of
very large and complex apps with wildy different display needs depending on
where the user is at. You hit a point at which the boy this works great
turns
into wow was that a bad way to structure things.
I've just had a thought...
if you don't want the header in the pop-up and you don't want a sub
application, cfcontent reset=true, no more header :OD
Ade
still a workaround...extra processing when it's not needed ;-)
and that was just a simple example...there are many far more complex
a...one of those sites...been there...have the scars to prove it ;-)
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.electricedgesystems.com
Ah but only when you request the pop-up! :OD
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 19:02
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
I've just had a thought...
if you don't want the header in the pop-up and you don't
Ah but only when you request the pop-up! :OD
LOL...still extra at time of call ;-) save those milliseconds!!
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
N, milliseconds are people too you know! They need to work!
They have mini-milliseconds (or should that be nanoseconds) to feed!!
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 19:21
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML
Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 19:02
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
I've just had a thought...
if you don't want the header in the pop-up and you don't want a sub
application, cfcontent reset=true, no more header :OD
Ade
still
I have heard some people advise against the use of HTML in
the Application.cfm file. I am wondering what the logic is
behind that thinking.
I make use of the Application.cfm file to display the
navigation bar at the top of my pages (image maps, etc.)
I have been doing this for years
I have heard some people advise against the use of HTML in the
Application.cfm file.
Like many Never do or Always do, this is purely a matter of religon ;-)
The only reason for not putting HTML in Application.cfm, is if the code
is not intended to be used
in every page.
I would even say that
Sure he gave you a reason...seperate processing/business logic from
the display tier.
Ok, fine, then why seperate processing/business logic from the display?
This is not a reason, this is just another way to rephrase the question...
Just like Who created the world?... The Creator... ah OK,
if you have a fairly large application where.
But WHY it is important to keep your action and content code separate in
a large application?
Does it make it less large? ;-)
The main reason to keep anything away from the rest is because you are
using it at many places,
so you put it somewhere in
Ok, fine, then why seperate processing/business logic from
the display? This is not a reason, this is just another way
to rephrase the question...
Because it makes your code easier to maintain? Because it lets you change
one without affecting the other? To follow your argument to its logical
Because it makes your code easier to maintain?
This is also the reason one would put HTML in the application.cfm, at
only one place: easier to maintain.
Since the purpose of CF is to produce HTML, I do not see how it can be
easier to maintain
if CF code is separated from HTML ;-/
--
But WHY it is important to keep your action and content code
separate in a large application? Does it make it less large? ;-)
If you were building a house made from brick, you could use lots of
regular-sized bricks, or you could use one gigantic brick. Most people would
find the former a more
This is also the reason one would put HTML in the application.cfm,
at only one place: easier to maintain. Since the purpose of CF is
to produce HTML, I do not see how it can be easier to maintain
if CF code is separated from HTML ;-/
I disagree with your contention that the purpose of CF is
I've been creating a layout cfc lately, then calling showHeader(),
showLeftMenu(), etc..
Seems to work great. Then for content, I built a productdisplay cfc for
instance. listCategories(), listProducts(), etc...
Will
~|
Amen Dave!!
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.electricedgesystems.com
~|
Because it makes your code easier to maintain?
This is also the reason one would put HTML in the application.cfm, at
only one place: easier to maintain.
Since the purpose of CF is to produce HTML, I do not see how it can be
easier to maintain
if CF code is separated from HTML ;-/
So
Why do we have rooms in our houses dedicated to different things? Why do we
have neat little plastic things to keep our knives, forks, and spoons
separate? It's all organization. No, it doesn't make it less large, but it
does make it feel less large. If I get an error, I will know exactly
Amen Dave part deux!! ;-)
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.electricedgesystems.com
Dave, I made your brick quote my last blog of the year (probably). very
succinct :)
-mark
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 2:37 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
But WHY it is important to keep your
(301) 770-9610
-Original Message-
From: Tim Claremont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 11:59 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
But what is your rationale for the opinion that it should not be done?
It seems to me that placing a CFINCLUDE
for example if you do that then say when u add a text editor the header and
footer will try to squeeze into the textarea and then u gotta go back and
reorganize the whole thing.
for someone like will its no big deal cause you'd only have like 4 pages in the
whole app to change lol
~Dave the
On 12/30/05, Tim Claremont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to me that placing a CFINCLUDE referencing a navigation bar at the
top of each
and every one of my 2400 cfm pages in my intranet app is more bass-ackwards
than
merely placing the code in question in the Application.cfm.
Yes, that
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
I would never use Application.cfm for output. As far as I'm concerned
its strictly for internal-use code. So I wouldn't use raw html OR an
include. I would use the include on my display template. I regard
Application.cfm as part of the processing tier
BOTH will include the header and only in one placeso why not use
the best
practice and include it via the template and not Application.cfm??
Who said it is the best practice?
If you consider Application.cfm as tool which can (among many other
things) generate a header,
why is it so evil to
I would disagree with that...depending on your design model, it is a good
way to include headers instead of having to write an include statement on
every page.
Eric
and Eric if you use a site template for layout you only incluude the header
oncein the template ;-)
So NOT on every page.
MVC Design says it's best practice... and I'm pretty sure this has
been well accepted as the better approach
On 12/30/05, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BOTH will include the header and only in one placeso why not use
the best
practice and include it via the template and not
One common reason is simplification - it's just easier to work with a
module that does one thing. You immediately know where to go to change how
that one thing works, for example.
Right, and this applies particularily well to putting any header HTML
code in Application.cfm ;-)
For example, a
Amen Dave part deux!
Just as I said, when programing becomes a religion, better start doing
something else ;-)
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm
(Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL
the purpose of CF is to build web applications. Web
applications don't just produce HTML
Of course, I was just trying to keep the discussion simple, not exhaustive.
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See
30, 2005 5:12 PM
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
BOTH will include the header and only in one placeso why not use
the best
practice and include it via the template and not Application.cfm??
Who said it is the best practice?
If you consider
Have you read my and especially Dave's replies?? ;-)
I think I'm leavin this one as...I'll agree to disagree ;-)
Cheers
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: [EMAIL
Of course, I was just trying to keep the discussion simple,
not exhaustive.
You should make things as simple as possible, but no simpler. How exhaustive
was my response?
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber
One common reason is simplification - it's just easier to
work with a module that does one thing. You immediately know
where to go to change how that one thing works, for example.
Right, and this applies particularily well to putting any header HTML
code in Application.cfm ;-)
If you
Just a small point, but for SEO you would be wise to use fully qualified
links.
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 December 2005 21:21
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: HTML In Application.cfm
I would think that there would be location issues with HTML
-Talk
Subject: Re: HTML In Application.cfm
I would disagree with that...depending on your design model, it is a
good way to include headers instead of having to write an include
statement on every page.
Eric
and Eric if you use a site template for layout you only incluude the header
once
If you use Application.cfm to initialize your application pages, and
you use
it to generate output, that's two different things.
Ok, but who said one cannot do two different things in Application.cfm?
May be, but on the other hand, when someone will have to modify
something common to the
Ok, but who said one cannot do two different things in
Application.cfm?
You can do as many things as you like. I suspect you could write your entire
application within Application.cfm. However, I don't think that would be a
good idea.
Absolutely not, you said He was able to do it very
I suspect you could write your entire application within
Application.cfm. However, I don't think that would be a
good idea.
You will not make an extreme look any beter just by showing how stupid
is the opposite extreme ;-)
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom
86 matches
Mail list logo
