gnumed-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Keeping gnumed focussed toward 0.1


From: Karsten Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Keeping gnumed focussed toward 0.1
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:49:42 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i

> P.S. Please have a look at a new proposal for the forms layer
> (I try to restrict myself to re-designing it once a month or so)
> http://salaam.homeunix.com/twiki/bin/view/Gnumed/Forms
There is a few things I don't like about this approach:

- it is reinventing an object database inside a RDBMS
- form definition and form data is not independant of form code
  - this is my biggest grief
- you are proposing to mix middleware and UI code
  - not quite but close enough that I am getting fearful
- using this approach we will end up with 2 million variables
  - not sure whether other approaches will be any better

- "it's a pain to edit templates in an SQL string"
  - true but not a good reason to me -- dollar quoting in 8.x
    will make this heaps easier
  - having to tweak a *class* isn't any easier
  - and is nearly inaccessible for non-coders
  - data is much more durable than classes

An excellent idea, btw, to define the soap_cat per form ! I
have made a notice for that in the schema.

Also, I fully acknowledge your pains with having a hard time
to access business objects from the templates and mixing form
defs and Python code. On the one hand one really wants to do
that (I, too, proposed it) while on the other hand one wants
to keep definitions and code to act on them separate.
Personally, I do think with some effort form defs *can* be
made quite passive.

IOW while I see the reasons and see some good ideas I am not
convinced to swap to that approach. Luckily all this is
post-0.1, eg. Tim, don't worry this will delay 0.1 too much.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]