I think "task flow" is a bit dangerous. I mean, JSF is an
_UI_ framework, business logic should be implemented somewhere else.
And having "tasks" inside JSF could inidcate we are aiming to do
complex service logic inside JSF.
I prefer the term "Faces Flow", but "flowlet" is fine as well.
Andy B.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Edward Burns [mailto:edward.burns_at_oracle.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 17:13
> An: jsr344-experts_at_javaserverfaces-spec-public.java.net
> Betreff: [jsr344-experts] [730-TaskFlows] NAMING
>
> >>>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:15:52 -0600, David Schneider
> <david.schneider_at_oracle.com> said:
>
> DS> The term "task flow" is currently used in ADF. When we first
> started
> DS> out with ADF the concept was called a "process" but we needed to
> change
> DS> it due to confusion with BPEL processes. We switched to the term
> "task
> DS> flow" but I never thought that was all that great either, we just
> DS> couldn't think of anything better :-) . The same is true of the term
> DS> "activity".
>
> I'm going to split this out to a separate thread. But personally I find
> the names in the initial proposal quite good enough.
>
> WK> So are suggestion welcome by the EG or has it become familiar at
> WK> least with ADF users by now?
>
> DS> I don't know about the other people in the EG but I'm open to new
> DS> names. Existing ADF users are familiar with the term "task flow"
> but I
> DS> don't think we (the EG) should feel bound to that name. My hope is
> DS> whatever we standardize will be based on the best of all the
> existing
> DS> flow concepts, not just ADF, plus anything useful we find we need to
> DS> add. Having a new name is probably a good way to indicate to users
> that
> DS> what ends up in JavaEE maybe similar to something they've seen
> before
> DS> but not 100% identical. I suspect having the JavaEE flow concept
> called
> DS> something other than a "task flow" will make my ADF life easier down
> the
> DS> road :-) .
>
> DS> Some random thoughts:
>
> DS> - Faces Flow
>
> FWIW, this is the name I used in the JSF 2.2 Early Draft Review, but I
> changed it back to Task Flow because I think it makes more sense.
>
> DS> - Enterprise Flow
> DS> - Application Flow
> DS> - Page Flow (although not all the nodes are pages)
>
> WK> - Content Flow
> WK> Just playing with word, or trying to find something more generic
> than
> WK> "Page".
>
> But we need to capture that flows are not just views, they are all the
> sub-classes of Flow Node in this diagram.
>
> http://javaserverfaces-spec-
> public.java.net/proposals/JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-730/flow-
> classes.gif
>
> AS> At the moment, unless you are using a 3rd party/custom solution, all
> of
> AS> your flows are crammed into single massive faces-config.xml with no
> AS> reuse/modularilty. We want a name for a small/lighweight, reusable
> AS> application fragment that contains bits of these navigation flows.
>
> AS> How about: a "flowlet".
>
> AS> I like the the parallel with "Facelets".
>
> AS> 2.0 big spec feature: Facelets
> AS> 2.2 big spec feature: Flowlets!
>
> AS> I'll probably hate it by tomorrow, but figured it was worth a shot.
>
> I don't like it today.
>
> I still don't see a compelling reason to leave the names in the original
> proposal. Can someone who hasn't commented already speak up?
>
> Ed
>
> --
> | edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
> | homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/