Re: [WebDNA] Webdna and CMS
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2012
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 108084
interpreted = N
texte = >> My understanding is that the: >> - Controller (C) part is where all the business logic decides that = gets done what will get displayed. >> - Model (M) part is where all the db interaction happens (whether we = are reading or writing records) >> - View (V) part is where we assemble the display output. Views = display static things mixed with chunks of dynamic output that were = handed it by the C (and the C may have been handed some of its data from = an M) >=20 >=20 > That's not exactly how I understand the idea behind MVC, though I = don't claim to understand it exactly. ;-) However, I think it becomes a = more ambiguous idea when it comes to web apps, especially when your web = app combines data and scripting in one engine. Yeah, you are right that there are several flavors of "MVC" floating = around, and it is also more ambiguous when the db language and scripting = language is one entity, ... but for big apps, it may still help keep the = mind clear to "get/save data" in one file (M), decide and assemble = blocks in another (C), and final output in a third (V). Anyway I took = my ideas from Wikipedia, and then Code Igniter (CI) (e.g. these): http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/controllers.html http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/models.html http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/views.html > Historically, the way I understand it, the model contains both the = data layer and business logic. >=20 > The controller handles the transfer of input. >=20 > The view is both input/output (forms and HTML/CSS) >=20 > However, like I said, I think the term leaves some room for an = ambiguous definition when it comes to the web... with the main idea of = making apps more manageable by grouping the different functions of an = application. ('functions', in this case meaning, methods, aspects, of an = app.) exactly! Just save us from spaghetti code! =20 (actually much of my employment over the years has been *primarily = because* of legacy tangled code bases and my staunch stubbornness = (refusal to lose a staring match with) even the most nightmare-inducing = tangled code and make the needed tweaks, but it gets tedious. > I like the idea of keeping a WebDNA page, WebDNA, and having as little = of WebDNA in the actual HTML file/s as possible. Then, for controller, = perhaps all the AJAX stuff is grouped together with unified = input/output.. 100% agree.. the separation of the languages makes it all so much = easier to maintain. >=20 > Also, This is where the idea of the WYSIWYG-like syntax would have = been great (if it would have actually worked right) Yes, for sure.. (I remember I tried that).. but if done well.. even = square brackets are pretty safe from WYSIWYG software and front-end = human designers when it is just one variable [here] and [there]. >=20 > At that point, you'd have just the required (or = whatever that syntax is ;-), and Dreamweaver wouldn't be confused about = it. Too bad that is on the deprecated track and not the fixed track. >=20 > Anyway, sounds like Tom Duke and I will be working on some ideas for = MVC, so it will be interesting to hear/see how sees it as well. Well before you guys go too far, you might want to see what I have = started with.. or vice versa (I wait to see yours). (but I am already = almost done with what i was going to show). -Govinda=
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
>> My understanding is that the: >> - Controller (C) part is where all the business logic decides that = gets done what will get displayed. >> - Model (M) part is where all the db interaction happens (whether we = are reading or writing records) >> - View (V) part is where we assemble the display output. Views = display static things mixed with chunks of dynamic output that were = handed it by the C (and the C may have been handed some of its data from = an M) >=20 >=20 > That's not exactly how I understand the idea behind MVC, though I = don't claim to understand it exactly. ;-) However, I think it becomes a = more ambiguous idea when it comes to web apps, especially when your web = app combines data and scripting in one engine. Yeah, you are right that there are several flavors of "MVC" floating = around, and it is also more ambiguous when the db language and scripting = language is one entity, ... but for big apps, it may still help keep the = mind clear to "get/save data" in one file (M), decide and assemble = blocks in another (C), and final output in a third (V). Anyway I took = my ideas from Wikipedia, and then Code Igniter (CI) (e.g. these): http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/controllers.html http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/models.html http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/general/views.html > Historically, the way I understand it, the model contains both the = data layer and business logic. >=20 > The controller handles the transfer of input. >=20 > The view is both input/output (forms and HTML/CSS) >=20 > However, like I said, I think the term leaves some room for an = ambiguous definition when it comes to the web... with the main idea of = making apps more manageable by grouping the different functions of an = application. ('functions', in this case meaning, methods, aspects, of an = app.) exactly! Just save us from
Spaghetti code! =20 (actually much of my employment over the years has been *primarily = because* of legacy tangled code bases and my staunch stubbornness = (refusal to lose a staring match with) even the most nightmare-inducing = tangled code and make the needed tweaks, but it gets tedious. > I like the idea of keeping a WebDNA page, WebDNA, and having as little = of WebDNA in the actual HTML file/s as possible. Then, for controller, = perhaps all the AJAX stuff is grouped together with unified = input/output.. 100% agree.. the separation of the languages makes it all so much = easier to maintain. >=20 > Also, This is where the idea of the WYSIWYG-like syntax would have = been great (if it would have actually worked right) Yes, for sure.. (I remember I tried that).. but if done well.. even = square brackets are pretty safe from WYSIWYG software and front-end = human designers when it is just one variable [here] and [there]. >=20 > At that point, you'd have just the required (or = whatever that syntax is ;-), and Dreamweaver wouldn't be confused about = it. Too bad that is on the deprecated track and not the fixed track. >=20 > Anyway, sounds like Tom Duke and I will be working on some ideas for = MVC, so it will be interesting to hear/see how sees it as well. Well before you guys go too far, you might want to see what I have = started with.. or vice versa (I wait to see yours). (but I am already = almost done with what i was going to show). -Govinda=
Govinda
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
New cart in ShoppingCarts (2003)
Inventory lookup & display... (2003)
international time (1997)
RE: Netscape v. IE (1997)
(2000)
SmithMicro FTP problems (2002)
Setting a null value for reply to address using sendmail... (2001)
WebMerch/Emailer Error (1998)
Database and Log file merged..... (2000)
Protecting webdelivery (1997)
unable to launch acgi in WebCat (1997)
WebCatalog2 Feature Feedback (1996)
default value from Lookup (was Grant, please help me) (1997)
Formating found categories (1997)
More Shopping Cart Problems (2000)
Protect tag for large groups? (1999)
How to get shownext to just shownext once (1997)
[WebDNA] WebDNA Roll Call (2013)
quantity minimum problem (1997)
Robert Minor duplicate mail (1997)