+1
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Andy Bosch <andy.bosch_at_jsf-forum.de> wrote:
>
> 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/
>
>