Details
-
Bug
-
Status: Open
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
1.4b5-dev / CVS
-
None
-
None
-
Operating System: Other
Platform: Other
-
21294
Description
Find attached a UML diagram of my 'first pass' at adding event handling to Jetspeed.
The colors are for visual clarity and only roughly based on the design
archetypes they represent in the Coad/Lefebvre/DeLuca UML color extensions and
domain-neutral component pattern. Don't get hung up on that semantic hook, the
diagram is simple and should be self explanatory. It is also basically
decoupled from turbine service, only uses it for this implementation.
The differences I identified between awt event model and the problem we are
trying to solve is that in awt it is an interactive, fully encapsulated
environment. The request/response driven http transaction needs some layer of
abstraction which I called scope to identify the different parts of the
server/client interaction that might need events triggered. This scope idea
roughly replaces the component idea of awt. I think I picked the right scope
points, but there probably needs to be some discussion around that as well.
There is a potential conflict between portlet set scope (maps to pane/page) and
portlet group (similar portlets) scope which need to also be further explored.
%regards -tk
