Hi Sylvain,
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Christopher Oliver wrote:
>
>
>
> >As far as Rhino is concerned I have been in contact with Norris Boyd, the main
> >developer, and I think that the continuations-enabled interpreter will be added to
> >the trunk in the near future.
> >
> >
>
> That's good, as
Christopher Oliver wrote:
>Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 6/18/02 7:59 AM, "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
Guys,
I'm really overwhelmed by your reaction to the flow idea! Thanks all for
sharing your thoug
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> On 6/18/02 7:59 AM, "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> >
> >> Guys,
> >>
> >> I'm really overwhelmed by your reaction to the flow idea! Thanks all for
> >> sharing your thoughts!
> >>
> >> First of all, I think the thanks should
M
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [RT] SpitScript - B-Logic that doesn't suck (
> Re: [RT] Flowmaps)
>
>
> Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
> >
> > > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
> > &
Ugo Cei wrote:
shameless plug ahead
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>> I'm not skeptical about visual tools that exist (gosh, I love GUIs!).
>> I'm skeptical about 'visual tools' that are possible but don't exist,
>> nor are freely available for us to play with, enhance and control.
>
>
> Something
HI Ovidiu
Thanks for the heads up. I guess you spotted I've been trying to catch up
with the flowscript discussions as quick as I can and obviously missed some
history along the way. Thanks for setting me straight. Sorry for the
misdirected noise up to now.
> From: "Ovidiu Predescu" <[EMAIL PROT
Diana,
On 6/25/02 6:52 AM, "Diana Shannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, June 23, 2002, at 12:25 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>
>
>
>> So what use cases do we have?
>>
>> * It should definitely be easy to write wizards in a flow description
>> language.
>> I believe this is the
James,
On 6/25/02 3:04 AM, "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Piroumian Konstantin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
For completeness of the example I have to say, that
>>> business logic is
im
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Sure. I tried and I *HATED* the fact that in order to do something as
> simple as
>
> if (request.blah < 0)
>call("error.html", request.blah);
> else
>call("result.html", request.blah);
>
> I have to write a 'ComparingSelector' and then use it like this
>
Diana Shannon wrote:
>
> On Sunday, June 23, 2002, at 12:25 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>
>
>
> > So what use cases do we have?
> >
> > * It should definitely be easy to write wizards in a flow description
> > language.
> > I believe this is the case for flowscripts (see
> > http://marc.thea
Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
>
> > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
> >
> > > Writing JavaScript even for client-side can be very tricky
> > sometimes, but
> > > when you'll start to perform component lookups, EJB calls,
> > etc. in JS then
> > > y
On Sunday, June 23, 2002, at 12:25 PM, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> So what use cases do we have?
>
> * It should definitely be easy to write wizards in a flow description
> language.
> I believe this is the case for flowscripts (see
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=1020526627
From: "Piroumian Konstantin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
> > > For completeness of the example I have to say, that
> > business logic is
> > > implemented partially in EJBs (in pure Java) and partially
> > comes from
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
>
> > Writing JavaScript even for client-side can be very tricky
> sometimes, but
> > when you'll start to perform component lookups, EJB calls,
> etc. in JS then
> > you'll have much fun trying to understand wh
I've watched this thred for quite a while. Some people don't like XML, some people
don't like
Javascript. It was mentioned on here earlier, and I think it bears repeating:
What is the definition of the problem?
I know, everyone has a general sense of it. But before picking a language, perhaps i
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>...they are not entirely separate since the business logic might also
>>influence the flow. There should be a good separation (SoC) but I think we
>>need to see the full picture. So I don't think it's totally useless to talk
>>about it right now - but we shouldn't mix
Piroumian Konstantin wrote:
> Writing JavaScript even for client-side can be very tricky sometimes, but
> when you'll start to perform component lookups, EJB calls, etc. in JS then
> you'll have much fun trying to understand why your code doesn't work ;)
Sorry but I don't get why. We are not tal
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
>
> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > >Ok. Here's my vision: a flowscript is the location where you place your
> > >flow logic. The flow logic is the collection of instructions that
> > >indicate how to make the transition from one page to another.
Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > There are yet many doubts to cover from the flowscript stuff that start
> > > > talking about something else makes less sense ATM, IMHO.
> > >
> > > This is one of them.
> > > Flowmaps are so powerfull that all the stuff that was innapropriate to
> > > be done
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Ok. Here's my vision: a flowscript is the location where you place your
> >flow logic. The flow logic is the collection of instructions that
> >indicate how to make the transition from one page to another.
> >
> >Everything else shouldn't be there.
> >
> >
>
On 6/23/02 2:09 PM, "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Christian Haul wrote:
>> Ovidiu, Sylvain,
>>
>> I spend some time to look into both treeprocessor and flow. In order
>> to achieve the above and input modules in sitemap I would need two
>> things:
>>
>> a) reference to the sitem
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Luca Morandini wrote:
> > Nicola,
> >
>
> > The page structure of HTML has nothing to do with Business Object or
> > Business Rules or other abstractions... but we should deal with it.
> >
> > Therefore, let's just try to centralize tr
Luca Morandini wrote:
> Nicola,
>
> you wrote:
>
>>How can you define transitions without logic?
>>Transitions are based on rules.
>>Rules come from algorithms that operate on the model.
>
> I agree with you on principle, but, as of now, this wonderful rules are
> scattered amongst pages, maki
Christian Haul wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>> Christian Haul wrote:
>>
>>> a) reference to the sitemap's component manager in flow. I have
>>> found two possibilities, either extending some routines' signatures
>>> (many modifications) or placing it into the Environment. But I seem
>>> no
TECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 8:26 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [RT] SpitScript - B-Logic that doesn't suck ( Re: [RT]
> Flowmaps)
>
>
>
> Luca Morandini wrote:
> > Nicola,
> >
> > for all our abstractions and wondereful paper
Luca Morandini wrote:
> Nicola,
>
> for all our abstractions and wondereful paper machines, the naked truth is
> that the web is geared toward presenting documents, not implementing
> applications.
And X is for displaying graphics, not running apps.
But Cocoon is not as an X server, it does cr
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Christian Haul wrote:
>> a) reference to the sitemap's component manager in flow. I have found
>> two possibilities, either extending some routines' signatures (many
>> modifications) or placing it into the Environment. But I seem not to
>> find the place where it is c
i [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 11:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [RT] SpitScript - B-Logic that doesn't suck ( Re: [RT]
> Flowmaps)
>
>
>
>http://research.sun.com/features/ace/
>
>
> This is an example of a b
http://research.sun.com/features/ace/
This is an example of a business object:
http://research.sun.com/features/ace/images/ace_graphic1_lg.jpg
And this of a Business Process.
http://research.sun.com/features/ace/images/ace_graphic2_lg.jpg
Looking at the business process diagram, where
Christian Haul wrote:
> Christian Haul wrote:
>
>> Anyway, given that we are going to be able to use input modules in
>> the sitemap through "{modulename:parameter}" it would be great if it
>> would be the same for the flow.
>>
>> Just another thought (I'm not yet up to speed with the flow so ign
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >Ok. Here's my vision: a flowscript is the location where you place your
> >flow logic. The flow logic is the collection of instructions that
> >indicate how to make the transition from one page to another.
> >
> >Everything else shouldn't be th
>
>
>Ok. Here's my vision: a flowscript is the location where you place your
>flow logic. The flow logic is the collection of instructions that
>indicate how to make the transition from one page to another.
>
>Everything else shouldn't be there.
>
>
So why do you need scripting for that? It se
> > > There are yet many doubts to cover from the flowscript stuff that start
> > > talking about something else makes less sense ATM, IMHO.
> >
> > This is one of them.
> > Flowmaps are so powerfull that all the stuff that was innapropriate to
> > be done in the sitemap (heavy webapps) will aut
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>
>>>Let's avoid the usual "let's tackle all problems at once" and let's try
>>>to get something hammered down before starting using brain cycles in
>>>some other directions.
>>
>>This is actually part of the hammering down.
>>I was talking
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > Let's avoid the usual "let's tackle all problems at once" and let's try
> > to get something hammered down before starting using brain cycles in
> > some other directions.
>
> This is actually part of the hammering down.
> I was talking about definitions (ie what fl
Jens Lorenz wrote:
> Exactly. It's already used within our own Cocoon-based projects.
> Currently the interface from Cocoon to JState is via an Action.
>
> Well, if your apps grow a bit bigger this tends to get messy.
> It would be great, if we could integrate this into a Java-based
> Flowmap (b
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> On 6/18/02 5:03 AM, "Ivelin Ivanov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>
>>>6. Multi-page forms are not dominating, and continuation based compared to
>>>even driven (GUI-like) programming approaches.
>>>
>>>10. Torsten asks how xmlfor
Christian Haul wrote:
>Anyway, given that we are going to be able to use input modules in
>the sitemap through "{modulename:parameter}" it would be great if it
>would be the same for the flow.
>
>Just another thought (I'm not yet up to speed with the flow so ignore
>if I'm talking rubbish): Is it
Christian Haul wrote:
>Anyway, given that we are going to be able to use input modules in
>the sitemap through "{modulename:parameter}" it would be great if it
>would be the same for the flow.
>
>Just another thought (I'm not yet up to speed with the flow so ignore
>if I'm talking rubbish): Is it
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Oh god no...businesslogic in javascript.. . no no no. I'm having
> nightmeres of "Sr. Application Developer"s (with emphasis on the
> quotes) writing nightmere webapps with "businesslogic" sprinkled
> throughout in this "flowmap" as one big huge jumble of spaghetti.
On 6/20/02 1:21 AM, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>
>> I think the idea is to have something which just works by default, with no
>> configuration necessary. In addition to this, more experienced developers
>> can use the current method, which is more co
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>Ok, let's start this really /proactive/ (I love this word, it just fills
>>one's mouth ;-) RT about a business logic definition system that has
>>these goals:
>>
>>1. has a quick write-test-correct cycle, ie not to be compiled
>>2. is easy
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> >>> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> >>>
> Oh god no...businesslogic in javascript.. . no no no. I'm having
> nightmares
> ...
>
> >> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>
> >>> Maybe, could you just help me come up with a business-logic stuff
> >>> that isn't writte
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> On 6/20/02 1:06 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> It may actually be better if we have a separate section in the sitemap for
> such scripts that implement business logic. This would help in separating
> what is business logic and what are flow sc
> From: Ovidiu Predescu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On 6/18/02 8:35 AM, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> > [...]
>
> >> 1. Stefano points out that flowmaps (I don't really like
> this term, a "map"
> >> is more appropriate for state machines, how a
On 6/20/02 4:55 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Assuming that I want to make my business rules *without* java, what
>>> can I use?
>>> Where do I put them?
>>> How do I organize them?
>>> Is there a repository for them?
>>> How do I use them in the flow?
>>> How
On 6/20/02 1:21 AM, "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>
>> On 6/18/02 7:59 AM, "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Your assumption is that the flow scripts are visible to all the
>> applications. I don't think this is reasonable. Just think of
On 6/20/02 1:06 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> You can also do everything in JavaScript, but beware that you're moving the
>> business logic in JavaScript, where it shouldn't be.
>
>
> Where should it be then (not provocative, just a
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Ah, ok. Just one point, the code above:
>
>
>
>
>
> would not match "calc/" (at least, in the past I had problems with
this,
> maybe behavior changed today, I'm not sure),
It matches (be sure).
> probably
>
>
You mean "c
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> > Hmmm, call me picky, but what's wrong with
> >
> >
> >> language="javascript"/>
> >
>
> Because my calculator implementation may be composed of multiple script
> files. This is not the case in this simple example, but I may need to split
> the implementation fo
>>> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>>>
Oh god no...businesslogic in javascript.. . no no no. I'm having
nightmares
...
>> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe, could you just help me come up with a business-logic stuff
>>> that isn't written in sitemap or flowscript
...
> Andrew C. O
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> I'm really overwhelmed by your reaction to the flow idea! Thanks all for
> sharing your thoughts!
>
> First of all, I think the thanks should go to Christian Queinnec, who came
> up with the idea, and to Christopher Oliver, who implemented continuations
> in
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>
>>Conal Tuohy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I haven't yet used the flowmap stuff myself, so I have a possibly naive question:
>what would be the flowmap (flowscript?) syntax to return a continuation to the client
>as an http c
> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Conal Tuohy wrote:
>
> >I haven't yet used the flowmap stuff myself, so I have a possibly
naive
> >question: what would be the flowmap (flowscript?) syntax to return a
> >continuation to the client as an http cookie? Is this relatively easy
>
Conal Tuohy wrote:
>I haven't yet used the flowmap stuff myself, so I have a possibly naive
>question: what would be the flowmap (flowscript?) syntax to return a
>continuation to the client as an http cookie? Is this relatively easy
>compared to url-rewriting?
>
>
You can't do that, as the coo
I haven't yet used the flowmap stuff myself, so I have a possibly naive
question: what would be the flowmap (flowscript?) syntax to return a
continuation to the client as an http cookie? Is this relatively easy
compared to url-rewriting?
--
Some rather random thoughts:
A flow (workflow) can be represented as a DAG. An edge
in the DAG represents a page sent to the user, and a
certain set of data recieved as a result of a user
action. The same page sent to a user may be part of
many different edges, which are differentiated by the
res
[Note, I tried to send this yesterday 6/17, but it never showed up on the
list. Are others having their posts disappear?]
Thank you for a great introduction to the concept of the flowmap!
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
[snip]
> 2) the concept of continuations is not transparent
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
>Guys,
>
>I'm really overwhelmed by your reaction to the flow idea! Thanks all for
>sharing your thoughts!
>
>First of all, I think the thanks should go to Christian Queinnec, who came
>up with the idea, and to Christopher Oliver, who implemented continuations
>in Rhino. I
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> On 6/17/02 11:22 PM, "Christian Haul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> I actually like the way variables are automatically bound in WebObjects,
> where you have to explicitly define the automatic binding, by mapping an
> instance variable to a form parameter. I was thinkin
Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I'm really overwhelmed by your reaction to the flow idea! Thanks all for
> sharing your thoughts!
Thanks for the detailed reply.
>
> 6. Multi-page forms are not dominating, and continuation based compared to
> even driven (GUI-like) programming approaches.
>
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >[NOTE: Giacomo and I spent a full evening and the next day (during
> >"Italy vs. Mexico"! consider that!) talking about these things, so the
> >above reflects design concepts of both of us]
> >
>
> Wow, so this is *really i
> First of all, I think the thanks should go to Christian Queinnec, who came
> up with the idea, and to Christopher Oliver, who implemented continuations
> in Rhino. I just put all the things together and implement the support in
> Cocoon.
Thanks to all of you then ;-)
> Now, there are few point
> So, what about a general interface to flow controller (be it a flow script
> or a flow map) that will allow to use any implementation you like? I know,
> I've already ask about this before, just want to remind about it. And as
> I've already said, though, I like the idea of continuations very
>
> From: Ovidiu Predescu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Guys,
>
> 6. Multi-page forms are not dominating, and continuation
> based compared to
> even driven (GUI-like) programming approaches.
>
> I used to program GUIs a lot, I think for certain things,
> event-driven is
> better than usin
On 18.Jun.2002 -- 12:09 AM, Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> On 6/17/02 11:22 PM, "Christian Haul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 17.Jun.2002 -- 09:35 PM, Ovidiu Predescu wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> - automatic binding of JavaScript variables to form values. This would allow
> >> you to declare somethi
Thank you eversomuch! Thats very helpful. I'm going to take some time
and digest it all and then
I'll provide any thoughts.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>Last time I wrote an RT about these things, the flowmap wasn't
>implemented. Today it's working, but there are things that I would like
>to cha
Hi Chris,
sorry for being so quiet during the last days. But finally I'd like to
anwser your questions and point out a few comments to your thoughts.
Chris Finn wrote:
>
> Wow, this is impressive stuff, Daniela. As others
> have mentioned, we too are interested and have done
> some design w
68 matches
Mail list logo
