Ok, that's fine with me and it makes pretty much sense. However, this will not
be enough to implement workflow completely. It is just a little step toward
workflow control as a whole, just the same as the simple workflow extension I
already proposed together with some code on this list.
I think all this should be put together to come up with a reasonable concept how
to implement workflow, instead of multiple single efforts to implement some
single aspects only.
Is there a team working on that?
--- Matthias
Ted Husted wrote:
> I suppose storing the information in the session would work. Though, I
> imagine this means the state value would be hardcoded into the Java
> source. I'm working toward scripting workflows from within the
> ActionMappings, and would like to be able to reroute the flow without
> changing the Java source.
>
> The insert/update flow is one example. Another would be inserting one
> record and stopping, or inserting one record type and then another type
> (and another type). Like say, creating a new vendor account, and then a
> contact record for the account, and then a new stock item for the
> account. With a dynamic action path, you can script something like this
> from the ActionMappings alone, without modifying the JSPs or Java
> source.
>
> I'm also now thinking that, given a dynamic action path, the best place
> to represent it may be the ActionForward after all. This would change
> the struts-config in my last post to:
>
> <action ...>
> <forward
> name="continue"
> path="/WEB-INF/pages/script/Form.jsp"
> request="true"
> actionPath="/script/Insert"/>
> </action>
>
> which supports the idea of having an Action return various logical
> forwards, which could map to various forms, and being able to program
> where those forms submit back to, all from within the ActionMappings.
>
> Matthias Bauer wrote:
>
>>In the actions DisplayInsertAction or DisplayUpdateAction respectively, I store
>>a state value in session scope which is checked in ProcessAction and upon with I
>>decide whether to do an update or insert.
>>
>>With this pattern I do not really see the necessity to dynamically set the
>>action attribute in forms.
>>
>>Do I miss something?
>>
>>--- Matthias
>>
>>Ted Husted wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The general idea I'm playing with now is
>>>
>>>1) Extend ActionMappings with "request" and "actionPath" properties.
>>>
>>>2) Extend ActionServlet to place the ActionMapping in the request
>>>context if request=true.
>>>
>>>3) Extend html:form to check for ActionMapping.getActionPath() when the
>>>path is not specified.
>>>
>>>So in struts-config you could specify
>>>
>>>request="true"
>>>actionPath="/insertAction"
>>>parameter="insert"
>>>
>>>or
>>>
>>>request="true"
>>>actionPath="/updateAction"
>>>parameter="update"
>>>
>>>and have the appropriate path automagically appear in your html:form.
>>>The Action can then call getParameter() to determine whether it's
>>>suppose to insert or update the ActionForm data. Viola, no hidden
>>>fields!
>>>
