Re: Commands vs. Controllers

> 1. Browser requests an URL (eg. http://localhost/test.m)
> 2. In maveric terminology it appears that test.m is actually
>    mapped to a "test" command.
> 3. Maverick dispatches the request to appropriate Controller
>    that takes care of command execution. Controller also takes
>    care of the flow (eg. returns a view or executes another
>    command).
>
> Any controller can serve multiple commands. So commands are just
> placeholders for specific URLs.


this is a good way to look at it--you could easily have a general purpose
controller that could you would reuse in different situations--something as
simple as:

<command name="report">
    <controller class="foo.ReportCreator"/>
    <view path="report.jsp"/>
</command>

<command name="pdfReport">
    <controller class="foo.ReportCreator"/>
    <view path="pdf/report.jsp">
        <transform type="fop"/>
    </view>
</command>

<command name="excelReport">
    <controller class="foo.ReportCreator"/>
    <view path="excel/report.jsp"/>
</command>

obviously this could also be done as:

<command name="report">
    <controller class="foo.ReportCreator"/>
    <view name="standard" path="report.jsp"/>
    <view name="pdf" path="pdf/report.jsp">
        <transform type="fop"/>
    </view>
    <view name="excel" path="excel/report.jsp"/>
</command>

but the point is it is your choice as to how you want to organize your apps.

--jim



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU
Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner.
Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission!
INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php
[INVALID FOOTER]