You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@turbine.apache.org by John McNally <jm...@collab.net> on 2002/01/17 04:27:42 UTC
Re: Are navigation classes in for the same fate as screen classesin
Turbine-3
It is a great way to structure many applications. It does not work so
well in a portal environment, though.
john mcnally
Gareth Coltman wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Sorry about my previous post, it wasn't intended to go to the list, but it
> doesn't matter!
>
> Anyway, Jason posted:
>
> >>>>>>
> No problem. Turbine 3 at the core will have no knowledge of a screen,
> navigation or layout but the model (the classic model) will still be a valid
> usage pattern. Scarab is currently using Turbine 3 along with screens,
> navigations and layouts. How you structure your view will be determined by
> the collection of valves used. Turbine will be stripped down to a core
> system upon which anything can be built. The classic model was the first
> thing implemented and works so your screen, navigation and layout templates
> can be used in Turbine
> >>>>>>>>.
>
> I guess what I am wondering is whether the 'classic' templating model is
> what will be suggested for use with Turbine 3. The thing I like about this
> way of doing things, is that once you have setup layouts and navs, you don't
> have to worry about them anymore. Has anybody else found a better way to do
> templating, or is this still the best?
>
> Gareth
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Are navigation classes in for the same fate as screen classesin Turbine-3
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Jason van Zyl <jv...@zenplex.com> writes:
> On 1/17/02 10:16 AM, "Chris Shenton" <Ch...@hq.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> John McNally <jm...@collab.net> writes:
>>
>>> It is a great way to structure many applications. It does not work so
>>> well in a portal environment, though.
>>
>> Can you explain more? We're working on a proxy-like application which
>> is close enough in behavior to a portal that I'm concerned about
>> future directions.
>>
>>
>>>> Turbine 3 at the core will have no knowledge of a screen,
>>>> navigation or layout but the model (the classic model) will still
>>>> be a valid usage pattern. Scarab is currently using Turbine 3
>>>> along with screens, navigations and layouts. How you structure
>>>> your view will be determined by the collection of valves
>>>> used.
>>
>> Can you explain what is meant by "valves"? I've seen them referenced
>> in the code, but nothing in the various HowTo's.
>
> That's because turbine3 is a work in progress and hasn't been released.
You may be able to find a description of the concept Pipeline/Valve
concept in Catalina's documentation:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.0-doc/index.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Are navigation classes in for the same fate as screen
classesin Turbine-3
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@zenplex.com>.
On 1/17/02 10:16 AM, "Chris Shenton" <Ch...@hq.nasa.gov> wrote:
> John McNally <jm...@collab.net> writes:
>
>> It is a great way to structure many applications. It does not work so
>> well in a portal environment, though.
>
> Can you explain more? We're working on a proxy-like application which
> is close enough in behavior to a portal that I'm concerned about
> future directions.
>
>
>>> Turbine 3 at the core will have no knowledge of a screen,
>>> navigation or layout but the model (the classic model) will still
>>> be a valid usage pattern. Scarab is currently using Turbine 3
>>> along with screens, navigations and layouts. How you structure
>>> your view will be determined by the collection of valves
>>> used.
>
> Can you explain what is meant by "valves"? I've seen them referenced
> in the code, but nothing in the various HowTo's.
That's because turbine3 is a work in progress and hasn't been released.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Are navigation classes in for the same fate as screen classesin Turbine-3
Posted by Chris Shenton <Ch...@hq.nasa.gov>.
John McNally <jm...@collab.net> writes:
> It is a great way to structure many applications. It does not work so
> well in a portal environment, though.
Can you explain more? We're working on a proxy-like application which
is close enough in behavior to a portal that I'm concerned about
future directions.
> > Turbine 3 at the core will have no knowledge of a screen,
> > navigation or layout but the model (the classic model) will still
> > be a valid usage pattern. Scarab is currently using Turbine 3
> > along with screens, navigations and layouts. How you structure
> > your view will be determined by the collection of valves
> > used.
Can you explain what is meant by "valves"? I've seen them referenced
in the code, but nothing in the various HowTo's.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>