 | Mailing List | | Home | | Forum Home | | JBoss - Java Application Server | | Tomcat - JSP/Servlet container | | Struts - A MVC web framework | | iText - An open source PDF Java Library | | JDOM - JDOM XML Parser | | J2EE - A mailing list for Java(tm) 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition | | JSP - A mailing list about Java Server Pages specification and reference | | J2EE Pattern - An interest list for Sun Java Center J2EE Pattern Catalog | | Servlet - A mailing list for discussion about Sun Microsystem's Java Servlet API Technology | |
Struts & Hibernate
|
|
|
| | | - feature idea - conversation names | - feature idea - conversation names 2007-08-10 - By matt.drees
Back
Does anyone else think it'd be useful to let conversations have a logical name?
e.g.
| <begin-conversation name="book room"/>
| or
| @(protected)(name="book room")
|
Then you could restrict which conversations components can run in.
e.g.
| @(protected)(legalConversations={"book room", "modify booking"})
| or maybe
| <page>
| <legal-conversations>
| <name>book room</name>
| <name>modify booking</name>
| <legal-conversations>
| ...
| </page>
|
This would be particularly helpful for nested conversations. E.g., say 'book
room' sometimes has a child conversation 'room preferences', and say you don't
want users to access roomPreferences.xhtml unless they're in the 'room
preferences' conversation. Note that conversation-required isn't helpful here,
because there *is* a conversation, but it's the wrong one. In this case, you
could redirect to no-conversation-view-id, or maybe make a wrong-conversation
-view-id attribute.
Note that this is just an idea I was thinking about; I haven't run into a
business requirement for this. And I think you could probably imitate most of
this already with a conversation-scoped ConversationName component and page
actions. But the syntax seems handy. And it seems like your code might be
more self-documenting this way, and it would probably help identify programmer
errors more quickly (I've had some frustrating debugging sessions resulting
from components being put in a parent conversation instead of the child one).
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic
&p=4073197#4073197
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode
=reply&p=4073197
__ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@(protected)
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
|
|
|
