Re: [Openflow-dev] OpenFlow thoughts

[<jm...@so...>]

Sorry for my bad english :-(

I was trying to define what an application is, and trying to explain why
now there they are defined by URLs: The URLs is the natural way to launch
an application from a browser, and this is what was done until the
"automatic activity" concept was included in Openflow. Now with automatic
activities comes this question, why not use Zope objects references
instead of urls.

Then I said, what is the win using Zope objects references instead of
URLs?

Switching from manual to automatic is harder, because of the fact that
there can be a ProxyPass Apache, SiteAccess products (etc...) which does
difficult to know what is the correct url of a zope object. So, from this
point of view, it is a loss (it is my opinion, because I think it is
important to switch from automatic<->manual fastly and easily)

A win would be that defining an application with a Zope object reference,
could be more secure, when you want that some procedures can only be
called internally from the Workflow, and NEVER with a HTTP request.

So I don't say it is bad or it is good, I was trying to see the winnings.


 From a point of view of extensions, URLs are a standard API ( - )

 But yes, there is surely some important limitations on the
parameters passings, and some things would become easier ( + )

So yes, it is interesting to extend Openflow this way, but having URLs
defined applications should not disappear !! (IMHO)

--=20

      __o
    _ \<_
   (_)/(_)

Saludos de Juli=E1n
EA4ACL
-.-