Re: Time out!
Re: Time out!
- Subject: Re: Time out!
- From: "RedBugz Software" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 13:18:30 -0600
On 8/14/06, Chuck Hill <email@hidden> wrote:
On Aug 14, 2006, at 9:25 AM, Alan Ward wrote:
>
> Mixing wod definitions in with html is simply rude :-) It makes
> refactoring even more of a pain than it already
> is (with KVC) as now you have another set of files in which
> references may be found.
I am not so fond of it myself. I have a number of pieces of code
that dynamically generate the WOD portion for use with canned HTML
(or vice versa). Changing these to having them all in one would be a
painful task. Luckily, the architecture of WOComponents is such that
we don't all need to use the same parser. Even different pages in
the same app can use different parsers.
If we are going to adapt an existing HTML editing tool for use with
WO we probably don't have any choice but to follow the herd, discard
the concept of WOD and merge both concepts into a single HTML file.
Chuck
I believe the Spindle Eclipse plugin for Tapestry allows for these separated files. I may be naive, but are there that many technical hurdles to allowing <span woid="componentName"> in addition or as a replacement to <webobject name="componentName">? Both Tapestry and JSF use this convention and both have Eclipse support, including WYSIWIG support either done or coming soon for both.
Granted, this would break WebObjects Builder, but pretty much any change is going to do that at this point, right?
Logan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden