Design stuff here [include file=fbx_switch.inc] More design stuff fbx_switch.inc: [switch value=[action]] [case value=merge] [include file=qry_merge.inc] [/case] [case value=display] [include file=qry_getdata.inc] [include file=dsp_showdata.inc] [/case] [case value=edit] [include file=act_setdefaults.inc] [include file=qry_getrecord.inc] [include fiel=dsp_editrecordform.inc] [/case] [default] [include file=act_setsessiondata.inc] [include file=dsp_showoptions.inc] [/default] [/switch] There are specified tasks for each unit of code. dsp_ files do not contain any query code (normally) but this is not practical in WebDNA because of the nature of the [search][/search] context. Now that we have arrays and stuff, this could probably be worked around, by putting all the values returned from a query into an array, but it does not seem worth it to me at this point... I just put this in the "not exactly fusebox" category and move on. act_ files perform actions. qry_ files do all the searching, there are more... Read more about all this stuff at http://www.fusebox.org That is just a brief overview of how I structure stuff. - Charles On Apr 14, 2004, at 11:44 AM, Alan White wrote: > hi Charles > > I have just finished building a sub area of our site which is loosely > based > upon the fusebox methodology. I have one page that runs the site and > then > depending on what the various variables / actions are I load different > stuff. > > My main index page consists of includes (design and layout) and my > main page > include contains a switch statement to select a page or default (home) > page. > A combination of my switch statement and various actions that are > passed in > provide me with the framework for the site. > > I would like to get more into the whole fusebox model as it ties in > nicely > with css based design and it's redesignability... everything just > seems so > much more modular and easier to manage. > > I'd be interested in how other people structure their sites / code if > there > are any of you our there interested in sharing. > > Alan > > > on 4/14/04 4:33 PM, charles kline at ckline@rightcode.net wrote: > >> Alan, >> >> Funny you should mention that. I pretty much use Fusebox 2 methods for >> my WebDNA projects, but I have not had the time recently to build a >> set >> of core files for FB v3 and FB v4 is now out, but PHP,JSP,ASP have not >> even moved there, so I assume it may have some ColdFusion stuff nobody >> wants to bother to reproduce - I do plan to look into it building the >> core files in WebDNA when I have some time for fun stuff. >> >> Anyhow, Fusebox 2 is not a problem in WebDNA. >> >> - Charles >> >> On Apr 14, 2004, at 11:02 AM, Alan White wrote: >> >>> I am certainly interested in learning about different coding >>> methodologies / >>> structures like a WebDNA version of Fusebox for example. >>> >>> I would also be interested in learning about the likes of upgrade >>> management >>> i.e. moving from flat db's to SQL. >>> >>> Just off the top of my head... >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> on 4/14/04 3:31 PM, Philip Edell at p@heavenlyhost.co.uk wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> They have a 512 k ADSL in the hotel so its not very likely... >>>> >>>> On 14 Apr 2004, at 16:16, Gary Krockover wrote: >>>> >>>> Regarding TOPICS I propose one session on Marketing WebDNA solutions >>>> to >>>> customers. >>>> >>>> I would also be happy to share my experiences of Load balanced / >>>> Shared >>>> storage WebDNA hosting. >>>> >>>> I would love to learn more about 6.0 and getting the most from it. >>>> >>>> SQL / WebDNA seems another juicy topic that I want to know more >>>> about. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14 Apr 2004, at 16:16, Gary Krockover wrote: >>>> >>>>> I 'spose a video stream for us non-attendees is out of the >>>>> question? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>> the mailing list |
|
Design stuff here [include file=fbx_switch.inc] More design stuff fbx_switch.inc: [switch value=[action]] [case value=merge] [include file=qry_merge.inc] [/case] [case value=display] [include file=qry_getdata.inc] [include file=dsp_showdata.inc] [/case] [case value=edit] [include file=act_setdefaults.inc] [include file=qry_getrecord.inc] [include fiel=dsp_editrecordform.inc] [/case] [default] [include file=act_setsessiondata.inc] [include file=dsp_showoptions.inc] [/default] [/switch] There are specified tasks for each unit of code. dsp_ files do not contain any query code (normally) but this is not practical in WebDNA because of the nature of the [search][/search] context. Now that we have arrays and stuff, this could probably be worked around, by putting all the values returned from a query into an array, but it does not seem worth it to me at this point... I just put this in the "not exactly fusebox" category and move on. act_ files perform actions. qry_ files do all the searching, there are more... Read more about all this stuff at http://www.fusebox.org That is just a brief overview of how I structure stuff. - Charles On Apr 14, 2004, at 11:44 AM, Alan White wrote: > hi Charles > > I have just finished building a sub area of our site which is loosely > based > upon the fusebox methodology. I have one page that runs the site and > then > depending on what the various variables / actions are I load different > stuff. > > My main index page consists of includes (design and layout) and my > main page > include contains a switch statement to select a page or default (home) > page. > A combination of my switch statement and various actions that are > passed in > provide me with the framework for the site. > > I would like to get more into the whole fusebox model as it ties in > nicely > with css based design and it's redesignability... everything just > seems so > much more modular and easier to manage. > > I'd be interested in how other people structure their sites / code if > there > are any of you our there interested in sharing. > > Alan > > > on 4/14/04 4:33 PM, charles kline at ckline@rightcode.net wrote: > >> Alan, >> >> Funny you should mention that. I pretty much use Fusebox 2 methods for >> my WebDNA projects, but I have not had the time recently to build a >> set >> of core files for FB v3 and FB v4 is now out, but PHP,JSP,ASP have not >> even moved there, so I assume it may have some ColdFusion stuff nobody >> wants to bother to reproduce - I do plan to look into it building the >> core files in WebDNA when I have some time for fun stuff. >> >> Anyhow, Fusebox 2 is not a problem in WebDNA. >> >> - Charles >> >> On Apr 14, 2004, at 11:02 AM, Alan White wrote: >> >>> I am certainly interested in learning about different coding >>> methodologies / >>> structures like a WebDNA version of Fusebox for example. >>> >>> I would also be interested in learning about the likes of upgrade >>> management >>> i.e. moving from flat db's to SQL. >>> >>> Just off the top of my head... >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> on 4/14/04 3:31 PM, Philip Edell at p@heavenlyhost.co.uk wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> They have a 512 k ADSL in the hotel so its not very likely... >>>> >>>> On 14 Apr 2004, at 16:16, Gary Krockover wrote: >>>> >>>> Regarding TOPICS I propose one session on Marketing WebDNA solutions >>>> to >>>> customers. >>>> >>>> I would also be happy to share my experiences of Load balanced / >>>> Shared >>>> storage WebDNA hosting. >>>> >>>> I would love to learn more about 6.0 and getting the most from it. >>>> >>>> SQL / WebDNA seems another juicy topic that I want to know more >>>> about. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14 Apr 2004, at 16:16, Gary Krockover wrote: >>>> >>>>> I 'spose a video stream for us non-attendees is out of the >>>>> question? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>> the mailing list DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
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...