#2 Templated sites, Transfer Object commands
Hi,
first we have to say: great work.
But we miss some things:
- How do we call template oriented websites that are build
via url path extensions (this is with asp.net working fine):
for example
http://www.companyName/appName/template.aspx/products/
sets ?
- How did your commands can be switched to
webServiced/.NET remoted/local commands ?? Our
customers are mixed with them !
- How do u plant in aspect oriented services like digest
authentication single sign on and so on ?
We think that a framework only for MVC is too much to
learn for the improvements ! ASP.NET is not J2EE !
- In ASP.NET you have a event based layer in J2EE u must
implement a MVC that is event based.
- In ASP.NET you have code behind that can do command
logik (we use code behind to get
ResponseTransferObject/RequestTransferObject that call
Business Facades to get Command logik (via WebService,
via .NET remoting or local)
- Why dispatch so hard if you could load xml dispatching
into DataSets (so u can visualize them and you can
update/insert new rules easily if you use xml-Schemas for
that) ?
You will see in practice that mvc overhead in a framework
will not be so useful like in j2ee cause most like event driven
systems are built in. You lose much flexibility with this
solution :-( MVC is not always classic or jsp model 2 MVC !
We developed in struts an barracude mvc's - that was nice
and hard :-) now we develop .NET frameworks that
developers can use things like CAPICOM, WSE and so on
in an MVC manner. But to built up a MVC system as a
single Framework does not only do the felxibility (today you
have to calculate the return on investment than to calculate
the flexibility !!!).
OK, but like we said: good work so far - hope we could give
you some other hints
Greetings from dotNetSol NY
Logged In: NO
Sure, that is true. We have the same situation like you described
here. MVC frameworks bring us more work than happyness
in .NET. Our customers like a fast ROI :-)
We implement MVC via code behind, events and TransferObjects
with Business Facades like you described. That is very flaxible
and fast to develop !
Yours
Dr. Rem Beck - germany (IBM)
Logged In: NO
What are you talking about is okey
but when you start implementing it sooner or later you will get
to something like maverick