At 22:31 28/11/2003 +0100, Christian Haul wrote:
Steve Schwarz wrote:
ModularDb is quite stable and Christian has been very helpful in answering any questions. I can't quite put a finger on what is "wrong"
:-D this saves me writing "go ahead, just ask" :-)
Thanks! Hope to get some time on this in a few days. Not sure anything's "wrong", just a question of "mindset" I think.
BTW I've been reading docs on SOFIA recently
From salmonllc.com? Looks interesting on paper - RAD for J2EE...
and am wondering if we should provide a _second_, less powerful but simpler interface to esql:
<ol> <esql:simple-query connection="pool-name" from="list of tables" [where="some expression"] [order="list of attributes"]>
<li><esql:get-string name="foo"/></li>
</esql:simple-query> </ol>
and have the attribute names collected from the nested esql:get-... tags. Maybe even allow for nesting and grouping in there but no paging, no conditional result blocks etc.
compare to the current, more verbose version
<ol> <esql:connection> <esql:pool>pool-name</esql:pool> <esql:execute-query> <esql:query>select * from list-of-tables where expression order by list-of-atttributes</esql:query> <esql:results> <esql:row-results> <li><esql:get-string name="foo"/></li> </esql:row-results> </esql:results> </esql:execute-query> </esql:connection> </ol>
Thoughts?
Chris.
The <esql:row-results> approach took me a little time to get my head around - and the alternative syntax is a good deal simpler. Would this be an alternative syntax, with the old syntax still supported?
Unless you can mix the old and new code together, though, this represents yet another choice between simplicity and power, of which there are several already :-)
To be honest, I don't have a problem with embedding SQL SELECTs directly into the XSP or logicsheet. The row-results logic, once grasped, is also straightforward enough. More of an issue is the insert/update/delete logic. In your GT2003 slides, IIUC, you recommended against doing these using ESQL or SQLTransformer: this is my instinct also, but what are your reasons? And could these problems be overcome by an alternate "simple ESQL" interface? If so, that would to me make a more compelling reason for an "ESQL Simple" interface.
Cocoon has the best architecture I've worked with for a very long time - thanks for all your work.
Best Regards, Thomas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
